یاری برای برگردان به پارسی

Discussion in 'Indo-Iranian Languages' started by SORENNA, Mar 9, 2013.

  1. SORENNA New Member

    Could anyone Translate below Paragraph to Parsi
    I highlighted Those parts which i have problem with!
    Thanks in advance

    Although the Hockney-Falco theory is very romantic to photographers, it is not
    without its detractors. In argument, and simply put, the old masters were that good.
    Never mind that Vermeer didn’t make extensive preliminary perspective studies as
    precursors to his final paintings, or that certain specular highlights were painted
    by Jan Van Eyck, suggesting that convex mirrors were being used. The truth about
    what went on is lost in antiquity, but remains a bridge to the true invention of
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2013
  2. marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    I'm afraid you have to ask a question about a specific word or phrase which you don't understand; this forum is rather not a good place for translations.
  3. SORENNA New Member

    its done :)
  4. marrish Senior Member

    اُردو Urdu
    Sorenna, I see no Persian speaker has come to your rescue yet, and since I am not a native Persian, let me help you a bit out with the explanation of this phrase:

    Vermeer (فرمیر) but pronounce the ی as a long اِ, who was a Dutch painter (of 17th century), before he used to begin to paint a picture, did not make PERSPECIVE STUDIES, it means he didn't study the PERSPECTIVE before he used to begin with painting (preliminary-ابتدائی). Extensive means to a great extent. (تفصیلاً؟ّ) Means that he did it but not too much.

    ''Studies'' is plural. So ''precursors'' has to be plural as well. Precursors here means '' things that are necessary before doing something'', I don't know, perhaps it is a stupid suggestion but ''لوازمات، پیشین'' can do?
  5. Treaty Senior Member

    What makes it difficult for me is the sequence and combination of the adjectives. My translation is:
    فرمیر مطالعه ای گسترده و مقدماتی درباره پرسپکتیو به گونه ای که پیش درآمدی بر نقاشی های پایانی (یا نهایی؟) او باشد، انجام نداده است (بود)ـ
  6. SORENNA New Member

    considering the first line of the Paragraph and " Never mind that" at the beginning of sentence!! and also what is coming after the "reddish Parts" all an all makes this Paragraph overly difficult for me to Translate!!
  7. Treaty Senior Member

    I cannot also understand what it is about (especially th 1st sentence). For translating it you should know about that theory. I can just say some notions about the general concept:
    #1: is about a theory of which I know nothing (about perspectives?).
    #2: the author is surprised why some painters were so good (at perspectives? related to the content of the Hockney theory?)
    #3: however it may not be a big deal (again you should know the theory): because Vermeer had no previous study and Van Eyck just copied a mirror
    #4: the truth (about the subject of surprise in #2) isn't known and won't be known, but it contributed to photography anyway.
  8. Aryamp

    Aryamp Persimod

    It´s very simple actually if you know the bigger picture and what context the author is talking about. I had to do a bit of research about that theory to find out what it means so here is the translation :
    هر چند نظریه هاکنی-فالکو برای عکاسان بسیار رومانتیک است اما منتقدان خود را نیز دارد که به باور آنها استادان نقاشی قدیم در کارشان واقعاً اینچنین ماهر بودند
    این عقیده با وجود این واقعیت است که فرمیر پیش از کشیدن آخرین نقاشی هایش چندان به بررسی پرسپکتیو نپرداخت و در نقاشی های جان فن ایک بازتاب هایی از نور دیده می شود که
    حاکی از کاربرد آینه کوژ است

    The Hockney-Falco thesis states that improvements in the work of painters after the Renaissance was the result of making use of optical devices such as curved mirrors rather than pure technical improvement on the part of the painters. So this clarifies a lot about this phrase because now we know what it means "the masters were really that good" : Those who don't accept this thesis believe the painters really improved by virtue of their painting skills rather than getting help from optical devices.

    And this is in spite of the fact that Vermeer didn't study perspective much before his final paintings (which suggests he didn't need to practise perspective because he was using optical devices to aid him - probably his final paintings were so good that it would be almost impossible to paint them without prior practice which was the norm for most great painters) and that some of the highlights on Jan Van Eyck's paintings seem to indicate he was using convex mirrors
  9. SORENNA New Member

    it is a little exciting!! your Translation is exactly like mine!
    as matter of fact I knew the Theory but i had hard time to Understand what is the rule of "never mind that" in that Paragraph..
    Thank you very much...
    this is my translation:

    گرچه نظریه ی هاکنی و فالکو برای عکاسان امری بی نهایت رومانتیک است، ولی بدون مخالف هم نیست. در این استدلال، به زبان ساده بیان می شود که؛ اساتید متقدم به قدر کافی کاردان بوده اند. بدون توجه به این واقیعت که؛ ورمیر بررسیِ گسترده و مقدماتی ای درباره ی پرسپکتیو به گونه ای که پیش درآمدی بر آثار پایانی او باشد، انجام نداده بود و یا همچنین یان وان آیک در مورد نقاط بی نهایت روشن در آثارش، که اشاره به این موضوع دارند که آنها از آینه ی محدب و یا دستگاه‌های دیگر، استفاده نموده اند. به هر روی اگرچه راستیِ پشت پرده کماکان ناپیداست، ولی دست آخر، همه ی این دست آوردها؛ به نحوی سکویی برای ایجاد دانش عکاسی شده اند.
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2013

Share This Page