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 reading and lecture are both about the reliability of paintings. The article questions regarding the paintings, created by the Rembrandt, for some potrays governing the woman's face. However, the lecturer states that each of the paintings was created by the Rembrandt, and refutes each of the author claims by providing the following evidences.
First, the reading states about some inconsistencies about the potray of woman dressed in the paintings. The professor opposes it by providing the evidences about the X-rays and analysis of the pigment of design, and shows forecolour was the part of a regional paintings.
Second, the article posits that Rembrandt doesn't includes the elements in the sense to fit together being the master of painting--Dutch painters. However, the professor says forecolour was removed by the original, and on illuminating by the light colour, the result seems so.
Third, the reading says about the back of a painting, and there is a panel of several pieces of wood glued. On the contrary, the professor expresses that due to the addition of fore colour these woods expands slightly. Morever,she explains that the original painting was made from the single pieces of wood
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 262, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'painting'?
Suggestion: painting
...s forecolour was the part of a regional paintings. Second, the article posits that Remb...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 43, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...cond, the article posits that Rembrandt doesnt includes the elements in the sense to f...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 227, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , she
...ur these woods expands slightly. Morever,she explains that the original painting was...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, regarding, second, so, third, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 12.0772626932 33% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 22.412803532 31% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1018.0 1373.03311258 74% => OK
No of words: 194.0 270.72406181 72% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24742268041 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.73207559907 4.04702891845 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81120713131 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 106.0 145.348785872 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.546391752577 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 302.4 419.366225166 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.7188492375 49.2860985944 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.8 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.1 7.06452816374 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 4.45695364238 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.153392575219 0.272083759551 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0585214869169 0.0996497079465 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0701046829824 0.0662205650399 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0937158623937 0.162205337803 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0677411047534 0.0443174109184 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.