This is one of those books where you have to look quite closely at the title: It's not a history of visual art, it's a history of pictures. In other words, Hockney and Gayford are discussing the history of human depictions of the real world on flat surfaces. They look at the interaction between imaginative reproduction — artists putting lines and colours on paper — and technical reproduction where we use optical devices to project images of the real world either temporarily onto a wall or a screen or more permanently onto a photographic film or a digital sensor.

Hockney, of course, has a long-standing bee in his bonnet about the way artists have used optical devices to assist them in composing pictures. So there's a lot about how every important artist from the renaissance onwards has been using a camera obscura to trace forms or at least to establish the composition of their work. It's perhaps controversial if you're an art historian, but if you don’t have a vested interest, it does seem to make perfect sense. Why wouldn't you use a tool if it's available and makes your work easier?

Of course, they emphasise that there's still always an important creative element in choosing the composition and lighting of what you want in your picture and then choosing how you want to transfer it from the projection to the permanent record.

Hockney points out that trained artists have often also turned out to be very good at taking photographs, whilst people who have no sense of visual art are unlikely to be good at taking photographs, except in a technical sense.

The book also covers moving images and digital creation of pictures — Hockney is the great advocate of iPad art, of course — but it’s just a bit too old to cover the rapidly developing topic of AI-created images. I’m sure there will be a chapter on that if they ever update the book. It would be interesting to know what Hockney thinks about computers producing images of penguins on surfboards or inadequately-clothed Asian girls in post-apocalyptic cityscapes.

It's interesting how this book is set up very explicitly as a dialogue with alternate passages written by Hockney and Gayford. Hockney writes, of course, from the practical viewpoint of a practising artist and also from his own aesthetic insight, whilst Gayford sticks more to filling us in on the history of art, explaining the background and context of the things that were going on around the artists at the time. It's a very good collaboration and it works surprisingly smoothly. I didn't find it at all distracting really.

The book is very richly illustrated. It includes practically every picture mentioned in the text, even the very over-familiar ones. In the paperback it's not always the most beautiful, glossy reproduction, but they're all perfectly adequate. The book is quite pretty to look at, although a bit chunky to be a coffee table book.

If you're going to read just one book on the history of visual images, this is probably a bit too random and discursive: you would probably want to start with someone like Gombrich. But this is also a very nice one, and a lively, entertaining read. ( )

Дэвид Хокни, популярный современный художник, и Мартин Гейфорд, художественный критик, историк искусства и автор биографий Ван Гога, Констебля и Микеланджело, ведут увлекательный диалог о месте и истории изображений в жизни людей. Именно изображений, потому что беседа, начинаясь с глубин веков, органично вплетает все больше и больше визуальных средств их воспроизведения, самыми узнаваемыми из которых, безусловно, по сей день являются картины. Однако и фотография, и кинематограф оказали заметное влияние на то, как мы воспринимаем изображения сейчас, и на то, как пишутся картины, а потому разговор идет и о них. Отдельная нить обсуждения — технологии: импрессионизма не было бы без изобретения тюбиков для краски, которые позволили писать на пленэре, а камера-обскура совершила подлинный переворот в живописи, хотя многие великие художники стеснялись признаваться в ее использовании. Хокни и Гейфорд, демонстрируя энциклопедические знания, распознают тайные приемы мэтров и даже находят у них ляпы. Впрочем, делается это без злого умысла, их интересует вопрос правдивого изображения мира. Ведь «если одни картины более правдивы, чем другие, они все равно не говорят всей правды, ибо это невозможно».

Weird and boring, unfortunately--was hoping for the usual panoply of the rich history of art, this time from an interesting new perspective, but an odd bias cropped up early and it was an uncomfortable read (until I stopped). I don't care that artists once used a camera obscura, it's not the shocking twist the authors seem to think it is.

(Note: 5 stars = amazing, wonderful, 4 = very good book, 3 = decent read, 2 = disappointing, 1 = awful, just awful. I'm fairly good at picking for myself so end up with a lot of 4s). I feel a lot of readers automatically render any book they enjoy 5, but I grade on a curve! ( )