When this assignment was first given, the first painting that popped into my mind was Van Gogh's "Bedroom" painting. The reason is that I have a Van Gogh calendar, one my father purchased for me to get me to appreciate art since he is a big fan himself. The month's picture was this painting. I woke up every morning facing it and I always thought to myself "why is this even a painting, it's ugly, it's just a room" weeks later I visited the national gallery of art and stumbled upon the original painting.
             I must admit seeing the original up close and in focus makes a major difference. In the calendar photograph, you don't grasp the details because of its relatively small frame. Looking at it made me miss the fine outlining that Van Gogh used to give depth to the picture. For example, the first line that I didn't even notice in the photograph was the line on the bottom of the bed, outlining the frame. Ti gave me the sense that there was actually a distance between the frame and the floor, rather than the photograph that made it seems as if the bed was sitting directly on the floor. The brushstroke of the chair near the door on the left is stronger as opposed to the chair to the window, giving you the image the chair is farther back. The brush strokes and their thickness differ vastly creating a dramatic effect in the depth.
             The colors in the photograph are bland compared to the painting. The yellows and shades of orange might have been created with the flash of the camera giving it a tacky look and much brighter than the painting itself. The use of blue isn't as powerful as in the painting. In the painting the blue against the strong orange of the bed frame contrast to pull you into the painting as if you were walking into it. Whereas the blue seen in the photograph looks old and dusty, almost looking out of place causing confusion in the order of the room.
             Although the text can be seen the photograph it's much clearer in the pain...