rather, romaria or maria ruina's friend is the daughter of the artist's main patron, but both girls, at that time, should have been 12 years old. they do not fit the age of the girl on the canvas, the next theory is on master katarina balnes. well, in this case, the age of the heroine. again questionable, other critics believe that the canvas depicts vermeer's mistress, but given the fact that the artist has 15 children, his wife, something is not very plausible. who is actually depicted on the canvas so far. the mystery, when the research was carried out, it turned out that initially the girl’s head was surrounded by green, deep, glossy. however, the oil tends to darken with time, so now it seems that the background around the heroine is black. century , the picture was restored. it turned out that , rather, he left a small glare in the corner of the mouth precisely because of this glare. really came alive. there is an assumption that the master painted a portrait using the technical device of the camera obscura, this unit is the progenitor of our camera , thanks to which the artist

the first version is the daughter, vermeia, romaria or maria ruina's friend, the daughter of the artist'son, but both girls should have been 12 years old at that time. they do not fit the age of the girl on the canvas of the following theory , but on the master katarina balnes. well, in this case, the age of the heroine. again doubtful, other critics believe that the canvas depicts vermeer's mistress, but given the fact that there are 15 children, the artist of his wife, something is not very believable. who is actually depicted on the canvas is still a mystery. when the research was carried out, it turned out that initially the girl’s head was surrounded by green, deep, glossy. however, the oil tends to darken with time, so now it seems that the background in the heroine’s district is black. at the end of the 20th century, the painting was restored . it turned out that vermeier left a small glare in the corner of his mouth, it was thanks to this glare that the picture really came to life. there is an assumption that the master painted a portrait with with the help of the technical device