If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   So turns out the Mona Lisa at the Louvre may not actually be the real one. Don't look so smug   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 6
    More: Interesting, Switzerland, ETH-Zurich  
•       •       •

7082 clicks; posted to Geek » on 14 Feb 2013 at 12:24 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-02-14 12:50:03 PM
2 votes:
iaith.tapetrade.net

Agrees.
2013-02-14 11:28:42 AM
2 votes:
The X-Ray
doctorwhotoys.net
2013-02-14 02:16:49 PM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: This should not be news for anyone. And the Mona Lisa isn't even one of the 100 best things at the Louvre.


And you have to deal with all the Japanese tourists taking flash photography of the BEHIND GLASS picture.  And different strokes for different folks when it comes to art, but I like the d'Orsay better than the Louvre.
2013-02-14 02:14:48 PM
1 votes:

Some 'Splainin' To Do: The tests on his 15th century portrait were carried out by a specialist in "sacred geometry" and by the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in the wake of the Geneva unveiling of the painting, the Isleworth Mona Lisa, last September.

WTF is "Sacred Geometry" and how does an expertise in it apply to this situation?


It's the study of how mathematics is used in the construction of places of worship, and is directly relatable to this study because The Mona Lisa is painted using those principles.  They start with the subject being seated in a triangle shape, and continue through to geometric representations of other points of interest in the painting.  Exactly what da Vinci did in each of those relationships would be a key to discovering whether it's a forgery, a copy, or genuine.

Regarding why it's so famous (aside from being famous for being so famous), the Mona Lisa brought three items to the artist's palette that had never been seen before:  First, it introduced the sfomato technique of not showing specific outlines, as though the subject is being seen through smoke.  Second, portraits up until this one were done in empty rooms, or at least with very uninteresting backgrounds, making this the first outdoor formal portrait, not afraid to have detail other than the subject.  And finally, da Vinci used perspective to draw focus to the subject eyes and take the background into the distance as an optical illusion, a technique not used prior.  For additional perspective, he combined two of these techniques; the borders of the mouth, eyebrows (there are none), and the rest of the face are blurred or removed so as to draw attention to the eyes alone.
2013-02-14 01:48:04 PM
1 votes:

Copperbelly watersnake: That painting is the Kardashian of the art world. I will never understand why it is so famous.


I've always been more appreciative of the Flemish Renaissance painters, but the Mona Lisa was pretty emblematic of the advances in technique made in the period. Sure, it's not as extravagant as what Michelangelo put on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel or intricate as Raphael's School of Athens, but the Mona Lisa is an easily recognizable painting by one of the master painters of the era. It's not so much a Kardashian, as it's not devoid of value, but more of a Stairway to Heaven.
2013-02-14 12:33:14 PM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: This should not be news for anyone. And the Mona Lisa isn't even one of the 100 best things at the Louvre.


Yes, it is.

Because once you've seen it, you can rest assured that virtually every moron with a flash camera will be crowded and jostling in front of it, trying to get a shot, while you casually peruse every other wing of the museum idiot-free.
 
Displayed 6 of 6 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report