Investigating Paul Cezanne Painting

Dr. Pruschy

- Pruschy used Ultraviolet (UV) spectrum to know whether Cezanne drew this painting or not.

- He assumed that Cezanne's painting was supposed to be older.

Dr.Andersen

- Used infrared spectroscopy (IR) to detect anomalies beneath the paint.

- she assumed it might not be Cezanne's work at all.

- IR refractography detected that there is another painting with Charcoal underneath Cezanne's painting.

- There were singals of an animal glue used in this painting whereas Cezanne was not famous of doing any underdrawings.

Dr. Montoya

- Used x-ray fluorescence (XRF).

- She discovered that all the pigments that were used matches the time when Cezanne lived.

-She concluded that Cezanne might have drawn this painting.

Dr. Simpkins

- He examined fluorescence from the surface of the painting using both short-wave and long-wave UV excitation from a mercury lamp.
- Some areas in Cezanne's painting were brighter than the rest, he added that it matched another painting by Cezanne in Brooklyn.
- He Concluded that the painting isn't fake.

- Cezanne did not sign all his paintings.

- This painting was simillar to another one in Barnes Foundation in Merion, Pennsylvania but smaller.

- Cezanne did from nature, he skteched them sepratley.

- Historians assumed that Cezanne's painting was painted in 1880s.

- There was no clear conclusion , Dr. Wandless had to make a quick descion since she might lose her job.