Monet and Chicago | Virtual Walkthrough 

I also enjoyed the wall colors. Well done

I live in Chicago. I'm going next week, lol

Ah, his works there are amazing!

Yes, please!

Can’t see the amazing details of each painting

Look up 'Branch of the Seine Near Giverny' (1897). I think that might be helpful.

Post a video of it

I will as soon as I can.thank you

I saw that show, show of a lifetime, I’ve seen it all after that.

What a silly question.

I really would like to know, I have the Chicago Art institute documentation to prove it too. Thank you ☺️

I'm sure it's worth a fortune...better hurry and post it on Craigslist!

White walls are the worst.

if anything the frames do

Disappointed, yes. Yet we are very fortunate this video was made and uploaded for those of us that haven't had the opportunity to visit the exhibit.

Why can you “never” attend an exhibition like this? Are you disabled? Poverty-stricken?

Do tell, I’d love to know what don’t you like them about

@@0083theo for a Monet it is too bombastic those golden baroquisc frames nonetheless it gives good on that petrol wall. It think of nuttree frames finer cherrytree frames in a half brown colour and then put the spotlights on it. Monet is classic and soft.

@@0083theo I don't say it is not beautiful. Colour appreciation differs much in the US. On such a wall I would do Picasso, Miro. Rubens, Van Dijck or Rembrandt but no Van Gogh, Lautrec , Renoir . What would work is to present Turners in it, just like it is. Impressionists and neo impressionists are pastel. So with Monet I would emphasize the shady lights. I guess the same disposition in the Louvre would create reactions like they put Monet in the obscure and gave him a baroque scarf. The exihibition starts off with the lilies no?

same

@@0083theo baroq frames with impressionist paintings do not match

Still lifes are definitely mostly horizontal.

@@Ziad3195 Arguably, but the Ms. Groom's narration doesn't bother to qualify her assertion with the term "mostly." "You don't think of still-lifes as being vertical" is absurd and factually incorrect. It implies that vertical still-lifes do not exist, or are so rare as to render the idea of a vertical still-life as an oddity, a curiosity. As I stated, there are many vertical still-lifes in the history of art. And anyone familiar with the history of still-life is well aware of this. So Ms. Groom's statement is indeed silly.

@@pnwtreehugger806 Still lifes are one of my favourite genres. Yes, you find many vertical still lifes just because the sheer amount of paintings painted mean that a lot of vertical ones were painted too. That being said, a lot, a lot more we're painted horizontally. Can you list 10 you enjoy that are painted? horizontally

@@Ziad3195 wrote "Yes, you find (MANY VERTICAL STILL LIFES (Emphasis added.) just because the sheer amount of paintings painted mean that A LOT (Emphasis added.) of vertical ones were painted too." A fact NOT mentioned by Ms. Groom. I in no way dispute that the preponderance of still-life paintings are horizontally formatted. Are you implying that I have? Your own statement basically affirms my observation, unless you can point out somewhere else where Ms. Groom qualifies the statement I've quoted. If not, her assertion is ill-considered, superficial, and silly. I do wish I had seen the exhibition. I too love the genre.

@@pnwtreehugger806 It's a 20 minute video about Monet. Not the still life genre. Not every single detail will be explored in great length.