Talk:Chiaroscuro

message: *I disagree that this concept should be mixed with Tenebrism.  I disagree that Chiaroscuro is a "bold" contrast between light and dark.  While it can, of course be bold I think a better description would be "an effective" contrast between light and dark.  In this technique the contrast, either gradual or quick is used to create a sense of volume in the image.
*As far as I can tell, tenebrism is a style, and chiaroscuro is more of a technique.  That is, one can engage the use of chiaroscuro without engaging in tenebrism.  Thus, they are separate.  
However, can one engage in tenebrism without engaging in chiaroscuro?  This could pose a long-living argument.  In my personal opinion, one can, and a number of tenebrous paintings I have seen do not engage in the technique of adding exposure to lighted darkness.  In fact, many engage in adding shadows to the subject. 
-Blutwulf
*Both are realitive terms under value in the principals of design.  However Tenebrism is also a style of painting where as chiaroscuro  is a fundamental of value in color theory.  So one could merge them under one category of color theory could they not.  
-Quintin Addelbrook
*(Fifth comment.)
I think they should not be merged. Tenebrism is an obscure, specialised term denoting a technique, school, manner or tendency—like, say, manierism. Chiaroscuro is a word from standard Italian that is merely descriptive, like, say mannerism. 
It also has many other applications besides simply a value, fundamental or not, in what is here called "colour theory". Like impasto, it has entered the general language and is not merely a term of art.
Tantris 18:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge debate

message: Since clear majority against. Tag in place for over a year Johnbod 17:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge tag removed 

message: :I just don't think "In a chiaroscuro face, one side of the face is lit while the other is in shadow." is either helpful or accurate. The lead definition, short as it is, and especially the picture, makes the point more clearly. Chiaroscuro is a noun not an adjective (COD, Collins etc), and by no means all such faces could be described as using chiaroscuro. Johnbod 13:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Face 

message: I posted a lovely picture of a Dragon courtesy www.homestarrunner.com, and somebody took it down. On one side, I realise that it isn't the most advanced image in the world, but at least it relates to something in semi-popular media. I wouldn't even know what the hell chiaroscuro is if I hadn't seen that flash film. I'm putting the dragon back.
Snuggles
KungfuJoe1110 05:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But it doesn't really use chiaroscuro, or only a little shading. There are plenty of animation/manga etc images that illustrate the term much better.  Johnbod 10:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chiaroscuro Dragon 

message: There should be more about him + images. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 22:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Rembrandt]]

message: The image :Image:Barry12.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:35, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Johnbod (talk) 11:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Barry12.jpg

message: The Tate Glossary says: 
Chiaroscuro is generally only remarked upon when it is a particularly prominent feature of the work, usually when the artist is using extreme contrasts of light and shade.
This is also what I learned in art school. Notice the use of the words "only...when...prominent...extreme" -- Many of the images here don't seem to prominently use extreme contrasts of light and shade. I don't think a work contains Chiaroscuro just because an artist has included a shadow area.  Aknicholas (talk) 12:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You, and they, are talking about what the article calls compositional chiaroscuro, as distinct from chiaroscuro modelling. But both need to be explained, as well as the other uses of the term. Notice their use of "generally only remarked upon"; they don't seem to agree with your last sentence. Johnbod (talk) 12:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy 

message: In the article on Neo-classical architecture it is said that this was in part a reaction against the use of chiaroscuro in Roccoco architecture. Does anyone have any idea what chiaroscuro means in the context of architecture?
Dranghek (talk) 11:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've not seen it so used that I can remember, but I suppose effects of light and shade have a place in architecture, though I wouldn't think of Rococo architecture as using them much. Maybe a mistake? Johnbod (talk) 13:20, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Architecture

message: I really think that the definition is inaccurate. While the rest of the article explains what is meant by chiaroscuro in modelling and in composition, it is not enough. The definition of "chiaroscuro" should be clear from the start and it is not "strong contrasts between light and dark".Amadeus webern (talk) 15:36, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition

message: Article claims that (regarding chiaroscuro woodcuts) "According to one definition of the term, they were first invented by Lucas Cranach in Germany in 1507" without providing a citation to back up this claim.  There is no such claim in the Lucas Cranach the Elder article.
If justification for it can't be found, surely this claim should be deleted? — so I added a citation needed thingy.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art citation shows an example of a chiaroscuro print by Ugo da Carpi, dated only "mid-1520s" and does not justify the claim "first made in Italy by Ugo da Carpi before 1516".  It does however state "Ugo da Carpi was the first Italian artist to experiment with the multiblock colored woodcut."
I have therefore deleted the claim of "before 1516" since no citation justifying that claim has been provided.
Michael F 1967 (talk) 01:05, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chiaroscuro woodcuts 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Chiaroscuro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130922082044/http://www.metmuseum.org/Works_of_Art/recent_acquisitions/1998/co_rec_eur_1998_15.asp to http://www.metmuseum.org/Works_of_Art/recent_acquisitions/1998/co_rec_eur_1998_15.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:39, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Chiaroscuro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070625130531/http://www.spencerart.ku.edu/collection/print/maps/zanmap.shtml to http://www.spencerart.ku.edu/collection/print/maps/zanmap.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified