Down the Rabbit Hole: Infusion

According to Wikipedia: “Infusion is the process of extracting chemical compounds or flavors from plant material in a solvent such as water, oil or alcohol, by allowing the material to remain suspended in the solvent over time (a process often called steeping). An infusion is also the name for the resultant liquid. The process of infusion is distinct from decoction, which involves boiling the plant material, or percolation, in which the water passes through the material (as in a coffeemaker).”  Infusion was also a process utilized while painting in the Renaissance.  Sandro Botticelli is credited with perfecting the process of infusion in his paintings.  He believed his love and passion for a subject would influence and become a part of the finished work.  Not all painters of the renaissance followed this method.

Look at the following painting by Leonardo Da Vinci.  This is a painting entitled “Madonna and Child with a Pomegranate.”

Most art critics agree this is a technically beautiful picture.  However, the emotional impact of the painting is one of coldness and separation between infant and mother.  The Madonna lacks eye-contact with the infant and the viewer and there clearly is no feeling of reciprocal relationship between the two.  The child reaches for the Madonna but the Madonna remains distant.  The emotional impact of the painting is different than one would expect from a painting of the Virgin Mary with Jesus.  But compare it to Sandro Botticelli’s work “Madonna of the Pomegranate.”

Art critics agree there is a qualitative difference between these two pictures.  When compared side-by-side (non-digitally) Botticelli’s painting emotionally affects the viewer at a deep emotional level.  Most people are impressed with both works when viewed individually but when Botticelli’s painting is viewed after Da Vinci’s most people “feel” differently.  The Madonna in this painting is emotionally connected to all of the people in the painting and the viewer.  There is a feeling of inclusion and acceptance.  The infant is not looking up toward the Madonna looking for relationship because it is clear the infant is in relationship with the Madonna by being held close with both hands.

Some art historians point to specific differences between the two men as influences on their painting style.  Leonardo Da Vinci had a petulant and perfectionistic personality that drove him to technical perfection but other attitudes hindered his ability to paint women in general and Madonnas in particular.  It is alleged he disliked women, in general, and spiritually he believed John the Baptist was the true Messiah and that Jesus and, later, the Virgin Mary usurped John’s crown.  As such, he disliked painting Madonna pictures.  Botticelli, on the other hand, loved women, the model who sat for the painting, and was a passionate follower of a group of people who believed Mary Magdalene was the correct successor to Jesus based on her being a part of the bloodline of the priest Aaron and her relationship to Jesus.  This religious group taught and demonstrated God’s love and forgiveness and supported the inclusion of all people into the Kingdom of Heaven.  His paintings of Madonnas were actually his rendition of Mary Magdalene and not the Virgin Mary.  Setting religious ideology aside, the process of painting this subject was approached differently by the two men.  Due to Botticelli’s passion for the topic, he would fully experience his emotions as he painted and allowed his emotions to guide his brush.  His art was infused with his strong emotional passion for the topic and, as such, he believed his emotions became part of the paint and technique he used when rendering a piece.

Does this concept of “infusion” apply to modeling?  Most modelers I have met are extremely passionate about the models they build.  They often spend many hours on research and execution of the piece.  Much time, energy, and emotion is used in accurately representing the subject of their modeling.  I have rarely met a modeler who is indifferent about the piece they are building no matter what the selected genre.  Technique is, of course, important.  But does their passion infuse into their work?  If you were to place two models, side-by-side, completed by two different modelers of similar technical abilities would there be a difference in the models based on the level of passion that was infused into the model?

Is there a difference in the following two models?  The first picture is of a completed piece I made four years ago which I painted with the intent of experimenting with a new technique.  My interest was in the technique and the model was purchased because it was somewhat cool but mainly because it was inexpensive.  The second piece is a current work-in-progress where my passion was related to the beauty and the story of the piece.  I was also trying some new techniques but that was of secondary importance to me.

If you place the models side-by-side, there is a difference, perhaps not as noticeable when digitized and when the second has not been completed.  It might be just a difference in competency of technique but it may also be something that was involved with the emotion that was prevalent at the time of the rendering.

I am intrigued with this idea of infusion and think it may have applications to other genres of modeling.  Would there be a difference between models built by the guy who loved Shermans or Panthers or the aircraft guy who loves F-16s or F-18s as opposed to the guys who just generally like armor and aircraft?  With the level of passion that is prevalent by modelers while making their creations it would just make sense it would somehow affect the finished product.  I don’t know.  What do you think?