Portret van Jacob Friedrich Ludovici 1687 - 1743

Curator: Let’s turn our attention to this engraving, "Portret van Jacob Friedrich Ludovici." The print, dating sometime between 1687 and 1743, is attributed to Johann Georg Mentzel. Editor: Intricate. All those finely etched lines lend a certain weight, don’t they? It feels...serious, official even. Curator: Precisely. Notice the framing. The subject, enclosed in an oval cartouche and further accentuated by drapery to the left. The symmetry, the balance—these elements solidify the sitter's importance, his place in the established order. Editor: You're right, the staging definitely projects authority, but look at the actual marks—the close hatching used to build tone and depth, all carved, I imagine, with considerable skill. What about the paper? Knowing its origin or maker, wouldn't that further our understanding of the print's journey and value? Curator: An interesting perspective. And undoubtedly relevant when thinking of its consumption at the time. The engraver expertly used hatching and cross-hatching, adjusting density to sculpt the light and shadow on Ludovici’s face and clothing. It yields a surprisingly realistic depth considering the stark, black-and-white medium. Editor: And the choice of engraving, rather than, say, etching? This process demands a level of precise handwork—translating vision to a repeatable matrix is work in itself. It becomes almost like a collaboration with the material, doesn't it? Curator: The engraver clearly showcases his technical capabilities. His virtuosity amplifies Ludovici’s dignity and conveys intellect. It also suggests the social standing of Mentzel as a maker: skilled yet still a tradesman. Editor: Right. Something in the layering of marks gives the work an almost… tactile feel. It is less about who is portrayed, for me, and more about how the artist is mediating the portrait's reach through the materiality of the print. Curator: A fitting reminder that the artistic worth lies in how intention and technique come together to build symbolic forms of power and that viewing from a purely material vantage could overshadow how we engage with art, perhaps. Editor: Maybe. But that tension makes our exchange meaningful, wouldn't you agree?