Rembrandt's Anatomy Lesson of Doctor Nicolaes Tulp became one of Rembrandt's more famous paintings. After moving away from portraits and self-portraits, he moved towards different subjects and more complex works. This anatomy lesson clearly shows his talent. The detail in the painting is amazing. The corpse, which is being dissected, looks like an actual corpse. The color in his face and body is gone and his paleness contrasts the other men in the painting. The attention to detail can also be seen in the forearm, which is being dissected. The veins, muscles, and bones can be seen in the opening of the arm and seems atomically correct. The expressions on the mens' faces are concentrated and each different from the other as they learn. 

Rembrandt was probably commissioned by the Guild of Surgeons, specifically those seven who are featured in the painting. In Amsterdam, twice a week, a leading physician would give a theory lesson. Every year in the winter, one public autopsy would be held. This was done in the winter because the stench of the dead body was most bearable at this time. The surgeon elected to demonstrate the dissection was called a Praelector. Doctor Nicolaes Tulp became the Praelector three years earlier and gave his first autopsy in 1631 and his second in 1632, which is the one represented by the painting. Public autopsy's were performed on criminals who had been hanged for their crimes. The man in this painting is 28-year-old Adriaan Adriaansz. The autopsy was held on the same day of the execution. In this painting a lot can be seen from body movement. Not only can the members of the guild be viewed as intrigued by whats going on, but also notice that some of their eyes are not looking directly at the hand being dissected. Some of their gazes look to the book sitting on the right. The book is probably a book that demonstrates the muscular structure. Dr. Tulp also holds up his left hand in order to show how the muscles flex and work together. 

The painting has received a fair amount of criticism, especially with the anatomical correctness of the hand being dissected. The main criticism was whether the flexor or extensor muscles are represented. I find this extreme considering how ridiculous it would be if he painted a dissected forearm from the distance he did correctly. The amount of detail in the painting is already impressive. The light source of the painting comes from overhead so that there is light for the doctor to perform the dissection. There is little color in the painting besides the red on the veins of the arm. This attracts the viewers eye to the forearm.