Mona Lisa Replica painted alongside actual Mona Lisa(looks better too). - Polidicks

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;34503983]Makes sense, assuming Leonardo and his student were painting alongside eachother. They would have different perspectives[/QUOTE] In that case it would debunk the thought that the Mona Lisa is how Da Vinci pictured himself as a woman.

The newly found painting looks somewhat different, I'd guess it's only a copy from a few hundred years or less. Her shoulder looks broader, her hair has fallen in a different spot, there are subtle different parts in her face, some shapes are slightly different. I don't think it was painted at the same time as the original.

[QUOTE='[CWG]RustySpannerz;34503224']If we were in the 1500s still, then I would agree with you. But I honestly think that art picks up value as it ages and it goes through changes. The original Mona Lisa is so beautiful, at least to me, because of hundreds of years of handling, restoration and the history behind it.[/QUOTE] That's all well and good, and makes the painting sort of cool, but I don't think it is that cool of a painting either, for the same reasons aceofdivine said. It's a great piece of history, but not a great piece of art, in my opinion. [QUOTE=MrDoctor;34506872]The newly found painting looks somewhat different, I'd guess it's only a copy from a few hundred years or less. Her shoulder looks broader, her hair has fallen in a different spot, there are subtle different parts in her face, some shapes are slightly different. I don't think it was painted at the same time as the original.[/QUOTE] It was painted by a different person, of course it is going to look different. That doesn't necessarily mean it isn't from the same time.

[QUOTE=Blanketspace;34499792]I wish more people valued art by how much they actually liked the piece, rather than how much it was worth. I'd much rather have the fake, or even a print of the fake. The desolation in the background is pretty amazing.[/QUOTE] You might think a copy of the mona lisa is more valuable because it looks better; but if that's the case, why not just download a high-res image of it and print it out? Why go to see a band play, when you can just download the MP3? There is a value to art that goes beyond appearances. The Mona Lisa isn't priceless because it is priceless - it is priceless because art collectors all over the world would pay any amount of money to have it. It's completely unique; The copy-cat painting is just one example of probably tens of thousands produced by the Renaissance art industry, but there is only one original, and the original is the truest image of the artist's work.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;34499709](looks better too).[/QUOTE] heh

i like the original much better. it just has a better vibe, it has that famous longing stare that's made it so famous. the other one is lacking in this

The new one does look like it was painted as if whoever did it was to the right of Leonardo. [editline]2nd February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=cani;34505228]I'm calling bogus. Why are they judging its authenticity on under laying sketch marks and not chemical compound samples found in the paint?[/QUOTE] Because you don't simply scrape up a piece of the fucking Gioconda to test it against something else.

The Original's face looks more perfected than the newer one, kind of looks mediocre looking into the detail of the lines in the original.

[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;34502941]Am I the only one who doesn't like Mona Lisa painting at all? It doesn't look very good or breathtaking, it doesn't seem to convey any idea and overall it just looks ok. If it wasn't historically old it would be just a generic portrait. There are so many better paintings today both digitally and in real life.[/QUOTE] Back then the Mona Lisa was considered groundbreaking because it was one of the first female portraits drawn at a 3 quarter angle and outdoors, prior to this it was traditional in that region to paint female portraits from a profile view and always indoors. And it was because of this painting, artists began to realize they didn't have to be binded to rules of tradition in order to create great art. Don't quote me on this, I don't remember where I read about this.

[QUOTE=OvB;34500474]What if the "copy" is actually the original and the one we've had for years was the copy. :tinfoil:[/QUOTE] The copy is the original. What we take as original is a fanservice. Look at all that cleavage added. It must have been revolting back then.

FP: Art experts united.