Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth-century Dutch painters. However, there are doubts whether some paintings attributed to Rembrandt were actually painted by him. One such painting is known as attributed to Rembrandt because of its style, and indeed the representation of the woman’s face is very much like that of portraits known to be by Rembrandt. But there are problems with the painting that suggest it could not be a work by Rembrandt.
First, there is something inconsistent about the way the woman inthe portrait is dressed. She is wearing a white linen cap of a kind that only servants would wear-yet the coat she is wearing has a luxurious fur collar that no servant could afford. Rembrandt, who was known for his attention to the details of his subjects’ clothing, would not have been guilty of such an inconsistency.
Second, Rembrandt was a master of painting light and shadow, but in this painting these elements do not fit together. The face appears to be illuminated by light reflected onto it from below. But below the face is the dark fur collar, which would absorb light rather than reflect it. So the face should appear partially in shadow-which is not how it appears. Rembrandt would never have made such an error.
Finally, examination of the back of the painting reveals that it was painted on a panel made of several pieces of wood glued together. Although Rembrandt often painted on wood panels, no painting known to be by Rembrandt uses a panel glued together in this way from several pieces of wood.
For these reasons the painting was removed from the official catalog of Rembrandt’s paintings in the 1930s.
The article states that there are problems with a painting of a woman's face that suggest it could not be a work by Rembrandt and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that experts showed that this work is indeed a work of Rembrandt and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading states that there is something inconsistent about the way the woman in the portrait is dressed. The professor opposes this point by saying that the some of the wearing were not original from the original painting. For example, the luxurious collar was added by other artists in order to increase the value of the art.
Second, the article claims that the light and shadow on this painting did not fitted together, even though Rembrandt was a master with these elements. However, the professor contends that again the portrait was modified and it not shows the original art. After the removal of the modification, the painting showed that it was using a simple light cloth, so the woman's face should not appear partially in shadow. In that way, the original painting made by Rembrandt is realistic in terms of shadow and light.
Third, the reading avers that the paint was made on a panel with several pieces of wood glued together. Conversely, the lecture refutes this point by stating that the wood panel was enlarged to increase its grand and value. The experts discovered that the original panel was made by a singular piece of wood. Also, this wood came from the same tree used by Rembrandt in other paintings, such as "the self-portrait with a hat".
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 168, Rule ID: THE_SOME_DAY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'same'?
Suggestion: same
...r opposes this point by saying that the some of the wearing were not original from t...
^^^^
Line 3, column 168, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...r opposes this point by saying that the some of the wearing were not original from the orig...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 79, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'did' requires the base form of the verb: 'fit'
Suggestion: fit
...ght and shadow on this painting did not fitted together, even though Rembrandt was a m...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, first, however, if, second, so, third, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1324.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.86764705882 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44763497177 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.492647058824 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 394.2 419.366225166 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 23.5465044077 49.2860985944 48% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 101.846153846 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9230769231 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.92307692308 7.06452816374 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.171182498714 0.272083759551 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0649794788391 0.0996497079465 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0569885324176 0.0662205650399 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105257610659 0.162205337803 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0559499760794 0.0443174109184 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 53.8541721854 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.94 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.