TPO-3

The article states that the painting of the women’s face could not be a work by Rembrandt and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor states that the portrait is one of Rembrandt work and refutes each of the author’s reasons.

First, the reading says that there is something inconsistent about the way the women in the portrait is dressed. However, the professor explains that x-ray and analysis of the pigments in the paint have shown that the luxurious fur collar was added over the original painting about hundred years after the painting was made, to increase the value of the painting and make it more formal.

Second, the reading posits that Rembrandt was a master of painting light and shadow, but in this painting these element do not fit together. However, the professor says that once the added fur color was removed, the original paint could be seen. The woman is wearing a simple collar of light colored cloth. The light-colored cloth of this collar reflects light that illuminates part of the women’s face, that’s why the face is not in a partial shadow. The original painting, light and shadow are very realistic and just what we would expect from Rembrandt.

Third, the reading claims that the painting was on a panel made of several pieces of wood glued together. The professor refutes this point by saying that when the fur collar was added, the wood panel was enlarged by extra wood pieces glued to make the painting more grand and more valuable. Also, the original painting is actually painted on a single piece of wood because it was made from the same tree as the wood panel used for another painting by Rembrandt