Featured

When the painting of  “St. John the Evangelist and St. Francis of Assisi” entered the Uffizi collection as part of a donation,  it was assumed to be a copy executed by the workshop or disciples of El Greco. Indeed a few people had seen it before and the Spanish experts of the painter had not even examined it, so for several years it was kept in the storage rooms of the Uffizi and not displayed. The analysis carried out by Art-Test prior to the restoration by Lisa Venerosi Pesciolini in 2010, have found in the canvas all the technical characteristics of the master and his unique pictorial language. In this case only non-destructive investigations have been performed:  the X-ray and IR reflectography scan revealed, below the outermost varnish layer, a complex reworking of the figures, with numerous “pentimenti”, changes made by the master in the course of work; and other important autograph signs such as the use of brushes of various types and sizes. The relative radiopacity is also peculiar to the paintings of El Greco, above all the inimitable insistent brushstrokes for the drafting of flesh tones.  For the recognition of the authorship of a painting it’s very important to identify a strong similarity with similar works of the painter, especially in the inner layers which are not visible to the naked eye. Indeed the disciples, but also copyists and counterfeiters, which flourished especially in the nineteenth century after El Greco was rediscovered, generally arrive to reproduce with great fidelity the outward appearance, but the internal structure, being hidden and tied to the way of working of the artist, is much more difficult to imitate and reproduce. In the case of El Greco, not only the inner layers, but also the surface itself have a very specific personal character, a complex work of a drafting extraordinarily layered, rich, sophisticated, expertly built with precious colors: lapis lazuli, lacquer work with a particular technique, which allows ot take deep tones, cold, as visible in macro images and as noted by the investigations in ED-XRF. This uniqueness made it always very difficult for disciples and copiers to imitate the master. But it makes it easier for us, after the results of the tests, to state with certainty that this stunning painting, now in the rooms of the Uffizi dedicate to foreign painters of the XVI and XVII centuries, comes from the hands of El Greco himself.

The survey results were published by the magazine “Art e Dossier” of February 2012.

The painting, which is owned by a private collector, was originally thought to be a copy of Caravaggio’s St. Jerome Writing (composed between 1607 and 1608), which is in the Oratory of St. John’s Co-Cathedral in Valletta, Malta. Prof. Keith Sciberras of the University of Malta says that the painting does not evince Caravaggio’s “vigor” nor “his brush work” and that, during his later years, Caravaggio did not paint replicas of his own work. Maurizio Marini, who during the last forty-five years has closely analyzed many works by Caravaggio, argues that the face is too coarse to have been painted by the master.

The collector had it sent to SACI labs of Florence to have it cleaned up for an exhibit featuring it next to the original painting as part of the events marking the 400th anniversary of Caravaggio’s visit to the Mediterranean island nation in 1607-1608. Art historian Dr. Roberta Lapucci, conservation expert at SACI and a well-known expert on Caravaggio techniques, asked Art-Test to perform some diagnostic testing before restoration. The new Multilayer® technique allowed the researchers to identify and examine successive strata of paint because each layer projects a certain kind of fluorescence. It works backward, from isolating the most recent layers of paint to the oldest ones, said Anna Pelagotti of Art-Test, the private Tuscan-based institute that copyrighted it. The researchers then performed the more traditional infrared analyses, which corroborated the claim.

“With the new technique I understood it was something spectacular. “, Lapucci said. She presented her findings during an Italian TV science show (“SuperQuark” on RAI television), and said she plans to publish her findings later this year. Lapucci says the assertions that discarded the painting as a copy were made “without seeing the new test results and the painting after cleaning. Both revealed, under the heavy retouching, a much higher quality level and a very different pictorial execution, especially in the area of the face.”

In particular the painting scans from Art-Test showed several “pentimenti”, i.e. modifications made by the painter during his work, about the composition, which obviously do not show up in copies, as the reference is fixed already. “The multi-spectral analysis done in February by Art-Test convinced me that the painting is actually a preliminary sketch by Caravaggio.” She believes that Caravaggio “did a great part of this artwork: the saint is all his, as are the table top and the objects. Then Caravaggio began the official St. Jerome on another canvas (the one presently in the Co-Cathedral) with no more doubts or uncertainties.” Later on the composition was probably finished off by someone else, and then there were subsequent restorations in Malta, perhaps not performed by highly skilled restorers, which made experts think it was a contemporary copy.

The painting has been returned to Malta and plans are underway for it to be featured next year at a major museum in an exhibition focusing on the importance of scientific methodologies for art investigation.

Sources: Washington Post and the SACI newsletter

In preparation of the exhibition “Novecento sedotto” at Museo Bardini in Florence, restoration of the Waterseller painting of Velazquez from the collection of the Uffizi museum has taken place. Another version of the Waterseller is at the Wellington Musem in London and in Baltimore, and the attribution of the Uffizi painting to Velazquez has always been a matter of discussion. The painting was first sent to Art-Test for diagnostic testing prior to restoration. The data of the analysis showed no contradiction concerning the materials used and data confirm that there is no reason to doubt its authenticity.

Concerning the relation with the other paintings by the same author on the same subject, it is not possible to ascertain which one is the first version. Based on current information, the Uffizi version might be the first one, but in order to confirm this assumption X-Rays and infrared analysis would be required.

A superb painting was presented to public as it became, through a highly generous donation of Bernardo Caprotti, part of the Pinacoteca Ambrosiana collection. Art-Test had the true privilege to investigate it with IR Scanner Reflectography, IR false color, UV fluorescence and Multilayer Method. It resulted as one of the most amazing paintings we ever came to analyze.