When interpreting a work of art, it is best to know absolutely nothing about it True or false

That is false. Here is the reason why: When you interpreting a piece of fine art you may already know who made it and you may have already seen a glimpse of it. But for sake of argument, say the answer was actually true and it is best to know absolutely nothing about that piece of art. You could ASK millions of questions but never get the true answer. In summary in my honest opinion the answer is false due to the fact that you may know things about not only three piece of art but the artist themselves. I apologize if this answer is not correct, but I hope this helps!

These traits are all equally important in recognizing the validity of artwork mainly due to an artists' consistent style and reputation which they have developed over a lengthy period of time. most famous paintings contain specific characteristics of the artist who created it. an appraiser would pay close attention to certain key elements within the painting, as well as an accuracy in measurement and color shade. blended textures and outlines are essential in recognizing an authentic piece from a copy. signature and imagery exist in epic proportions to balance out each trait as they coexist in harmony, depending on preference and style of each artist. no two original pieces are virtually identical, although it may be almost impossible to see discrepancy with the naked eye.

Answerthe paleolithic period;