82 ON THE RELATION OF OPTICS TO PAINTING. 



placed in comparison with the more distant ones ; the 

 former appear to recede, the latter appear to move with 

 us. Hence arises a far stricter distinction between what 

 is near and what is distant, than seeing with one eye 

 from one and the same spot would ever afford us. If 

 we move towards the picture, the sensuous impression 

 that it is a flat picture hanging against the wall forces 

 itself more strongly upon us than if we look at it while 

 we are stationary. Compared with a large picture at a 

 greater distance, all those elements which depend on bin- 

 ocular vision and on the movement of the body are less 

 operative, because in very distant objects the differ- 

 ences between the images of the two eyes, or be- 

 tween the aspect from adjacent points of view, seem 

 less. Hence large pictures furnish a less distorted 

 aspect of their object than small ones, while the 

 impression on a stationary eye, of a small picture close 

 at hand, might be just the same as that of a large 

 distant one. In a painting close at hand, the fact that 

 it is a flat picture continually forces itself more power- 

 fully and more distinctly on our perception. 



The fact that perspective drawings, which are taken 

 from too near a point of view, may easily produce a 

 distorted impression, is, I think, connected with this. 

 For here the want of the second representation for the 

 other eye, which would be very different, is too marked. 

 On the other hand, what are called geometrical pro- 



