Ask the Curator

Have a question? Submit it here and look for your answer to appear below.

Submit

Previously Submitted Questions (Click for Answer)

• Who made the Presentation at the Temple?

  The artist's name is Corrado Giaquinto.

• Considering the importance of natural light, what is the best time of day to view the exhibition? and why?

  The answer to this simple question is actually quite complex:

  • Main Gallery/Grande Galerie - once you accept that daylight is an asset to the viewing experience, you would want to see as many different light situations as possible; even when there is very little light. The landscape paintings are very interesting, the grays in the van Goyen paintings seem blue, the sky-color of the Hubert Robert shifts from a milky quality to very subtle shades of blue and dark blue.
  • Entrance Gallery - the Caravaggesque paintings in that gallery actually look much more interesting in relative darkness (to my eyes); in relative darkness the viewing process is prioritized, whereas during more illuminated parts of the day particularly the Fignolia painting is more of a visual chaos, where every part is of similar importance.
  • Cube Gallery - golden background of the Vivarini painting, which is in the viewing axis for those who walk towards the Cube, sparkles, no matter if there is a lot or very little daylight in the Main Gallery. The other paintings in the Cube also hold up quite well, however, the best time in the day, at least at this time of the year, is at around 3 pm.
• Would it be better to view the works at multiple times in order to get a more robust experience of the way lighting affects them?

  Yes, it is important to see the paintings at different times of the day. The Pulitzer situation is the opposite of the traditional ideal that gallery light needs to be stabilized. Don't forget that the concept of spotlights only emerged in the second half of the 20th century.

• You talk about the artists working and displaying work in very low lighting situations before electricity. Does the Pulitzer have any permanent artificial lighting in the galleries during this exhibition?

  Well, we have permanent artificial light for the drawings - the requirement for drawings is 5 foot candles, a level that is impossible to achieve with daylight (the natural light level is either far too high or far too low). In the other galleries, we decided to accomodate the needs of those who would like to study the works rather than experience them by switching on the artificial light for the last 45 minutes of our opening hours.

• You mention that some details of the works are not visible as quickly as we might expect due to the Pulitzer's viewing conditions. Is that an encouragement to get closer to the works and see details more slowly and gradually instead of all at once?

  It is not necessarily an encouragement to get closer or farther away: closeness or remoteness (if not a combination of the two) would have always been determined by the layout of the space, the presence of, say altars, tables etc. But, particularly in the case of the Caravaggisti in the Entrance gallery, the relative absence of light determines the speed with which you can process what you see: at first the viewer only sees the extremely light parts of the composition (generally parts of bodies) and has a chance to imagine the rest before it actually appears to the eye. In that sense, Caravaggisti stage the viewing process in time, allowing very often the viewer's imagination to precede the visual evidence. This is the opposite of modern visual habits, where it is expected to see "everything" at once.