The Mona Lisa Mystery
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 พ.ค. 2024
- The Mona Lisa in the Louvre is the most famous work of art in the world. Millions of visitors admire her every year. She has become synonymous with beauty and perfection.
But did you know that the Mona Lisa was relatively unknown until it was stolen in 1911. Or that there is a second Mona Lisa? The so-called Isleworth Mona Lisa is hotly disputed but many believe it is the work of the master.
Was the Mona Lisa from the Louvre not Da Vinci’s first portrait of this "certain Florentine lady"? Now, with the help of modern science and new sources, some of the secrets of the Mona Lisa can finally be revealed.
#dwhistoryandculture #monalisa
For more visit: www.dw.com/en/culture/s-1441
⮞ Follow DW Culture on Facebook: / dw.culture
⮞ Follow DW Culture on Twitter: DW_Culture
Please follow DW's netiquette: p.dw.com/p/MF1G
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA W1D3 | Summer | เคาะ 8 ทีมแรก ที่ไปรอวันอาทิตย์](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eKFbDC1qe38/mqdefault.jpg)
The funny thing is I wouldn't be surprised if we brought him back and he said " both where painted by my students. I had more important things to do"
Sounds plausible...
@@AlexLog314 Usually the simplest expansion is the correct one. Just many people make a career out of overthinking simple things. That's why the person that fixes your roof makes more than a lawyer today.
He carried the mona lisa with him everywhere he went
Why can't there be two Originals . After all, they are showing the same woman at different ages. Makes sense for an artist to not be happy with an ordered work and later painted another years later. As the sitter intrigued his artists eye.
😂😂😂
Sean Pertwee could narrate a HR policy and procedures manual and make it sound mysterious.
True! 😄
HR "policy" _IS_ mysterious, one rule for me, one rule for thee
@@noth606 yes, but unlike, say, the Mona Lisa, or the purpose of life, a HR policy will truly never be understood. It is, in that view, quite boring.
HR policies are often baffling and mysterious...
wow Alfred from Gotham is doing a documentary, that is amazing lol joking a side Sean Pertwee is amazing
Seems to me that the evidence is telling us the design may have been a sort of work-study exercise where Leonardo taught his students principles he needed them to know.
Could be.
doubt it, Masters were not teaching their students in the same way we do today, they observed the master work and make copies while he was working on them.
It does not seem anywhere near as old. There is so little microcracking from the wood aging. Unless the example in the video is not the painting in question. To me it looks like a broad weave canvas. Perhaps it is a prop?
Fell asleep to this 5 nights in a row. Mystery? 10/10. Nerd factor? 10/10. Unintentional ASMR? 11/10
I resemble your remark.
I also fell asleep several times.
I think _Fake or Fortune_ does a better job of this.
100% falling asleep to it right now
true but youtube ads woke me up
You obviously need sleep LOL
I like the idea that while experimenting with canvas for Giacondo's portrait he painted the unfinished version and then years later, using his refined techniques to create the Louvre version.
A quotation that I got online some time back from Leornado (allegedly) seems to fit the bill:
"Art is never finished, only abandoned."
The idea that the second painting rests hidden in a vault feels like a crime. Art, without being seen, has no purpose.
Yeah, isn't it great? Spend millions on a work of art only to lock it away unseen, unshared, unstudied by those who appreciate. Sad.
The owner can see it in its vault
Unless, of course, the fact that wonderful artistry and beauty is locked away unseen by the world is a metaphor for unseen talent held within and, in that respect, the vault forms part of the artwork (😳)
@@juanlui284 WHOOSH
@@deanharding740 ahahahahaha!
Back in art history in high school, i remember being taught that Leonardo had something like 7 Mona Lisa's spread around his home, studio, and travel packs, that he kind of worked on each over time, improving them until he reached the perfection of the Louvre version.
Its probably true, would help if the female in the picture is his wife!
People believe it’s a self portrait
Makes sense.
In my opinión, I believe that what we are calling the second Mona Lisa is a better version than the one in the Louvre. It has the lashes and the eyebrows. It has a better rosier color to the lips, and her eyes don’t look so close together as in the Louvre version.
The Mona Lisa was believed to have started out as a commissioned piece @@Goodboys69
Did anyone think that Leonardo wanted to fulfill his promise of the portrait to the family so he started painting a second one to send to them with Mona Lisa aged slightly because it had been years later. Sometimes when people get toward the end of their life they think of the things they never finished and try to get things done.
Sounds plausible. Seems impossible to say what did and didnt happen.
It's fascinating how contemporary experts claim to have a profound understanding of a man who lived about 500 years ago, arguably more than those who were his contemporaries. Leonardo da Vinci was an artist with innovative ideas about machinery that he largely kept to himself and rarely shared. After his passing, even his apprentice discarded many of his notebooks, seeing no value in them. Yet, today's "scholars" believe they can decipher every thought that crossed his mind with each stroke of his brush. Like many brilliant minds, Leonardo was likely prone to distraction and quickly lost interest once he had figured out a concept, moving on to the next idea without completing the previous project. This trait is common among creative geniuses who excel in conceptualizing but may not follow through to completion. The experts who claim to thoroughly understand him are the same ones who find shapes in the stars and animals in the clouds, attempting to convince themselves and others of their existence.
Thanks for sharing your perspective with us and our community!
What do you believe is wrong with people who are born with an active visual imagination?
@@kristinamullen4066 If you are alluding to the "contemporary experts," it is indeed the case that they proffer interpretations as if they had personal acquaintance with the artist, thereby portraying imaginative speculation as irrefutable fact. This approach is, in essence, merely playful conjecture masquerading as certainty, designed to captivate the audience. While I harbor no objections to the exercise of visual imagination-being an adept of such creative endeavors myself-I do not purport my fanciful musings to be factual.
Nonsense. I figured out something about Leonardo that nobody has ever thought of before, as far as I am aware. You discount the intelligence of others, not a very kind or wise assumption of your own. What I figured out has to do with his “mirror” writing, and how rather than why it was done
Douglas Adams wrote a Doctor Who episode about multiple Mona Lisa paintings in 1979
"City of Death",featuring Tom Baker as Dr Who was the story.Maybe Count Skorleoni did make more copies of the picture(or Skaroth last of the Jagaroth)!
@@kinsin66 yes! Tom was my Doctor too!
Those copies were painted by DaVinci, but on canvases that were sabotaged by the doctor with “This a fake “ in felt tip written on them. DaVinci was instructed to paint over them.
As Douglas Adams immortal work explains the answer is 42.
The most helpful observation thus far.
I got to see an amazing exhibit of Leonardo's notebooks and diagrams in Montreal in the late 80s. He waa so much more than a portrait painter.
he was barely a painter at all, compared to his other work
But only his artwork makes him eternally fascinating. (Sketches of dissected corpses and war-machine prototypes don't beguile and feed the soul.)
@@mulemule Don't tell other people what to feel about which works of Da Vinci. The fact the he invented so many things that were far ahead of his time is beguiling to many.
@@dieSchreckschraube _"Don't tell other people what to feel about which works of Da Vinci."_ Sadly, he didn't invent a means for you to understand irony.
He wasn't really a painter at all. It was just a hobby and he did very few commissioned pieces. He should be more well known as a designer of war machines, an engineer, and a scientist.
20:45 i‘m slightly disappointed that none of the costume designers gave that actress a veil. if you look closely at the Mona Lisa paintings you can see the lady portrayed wearing a delicate piece of cloth over her hair
A sign of pregnacy for Women of prestige
The wide dimpled chin threw it off for me (Jaconde has a pointy chin - a delicate heart- shaped face ). Good grief.
I'm often disappointed by the historical accuracy of the costume in most recreations. Unfortunately, it's not always up to the costume designer/wardrobe department to provide an exact reproduction. The director may have other ideas. Perhaps the wardrobe department didn't have a fine enough veil without looking like a modern fabric?
Becaue the first one doesn't have a veil at all that's why the younger version doesn't have a veil.
@@janwhite1361 Who is the beautiful actress portraying the Mona Lisa?
It's said that he carried the painting everywhere he went, evidently it was special to him
Indeed. I consider myself a fair amateur artist, and while I'm certainly no Leonardo or being paid vast amounts of money to part with my creations I'm non-the-less quite attached to all my works. There are some, either because I'm particularly happy with the result or because I'm very attached to the subject, that I'd not part with for all the tea in China. I'm only human, would Leonardo be any different?
@@charlesjmouseYes, if it was a piece that had been commissioned it should have been delivered to the customer. The accounts of him carrying it around are all within a time frame that could suggest he was just working on it. Moreover, the accounts attributed to recalling the painting are only tenuously linked to the painting. They are assuming it is the Mona Lisa they are talking about. In fact they are sure of none of that, a large amount of supposition must be used to arrive at the conclusions.
Yes, he carried it with him into exile.
He took it with him to the loo.
I doubt that he carried it everywhere. Unless you’ve got some compelling evidence it’s just as weird now to always have a painting under your arm as it was then.
One thing is certain, unlike several abandoned and unfinished works by the somewhat vagabond artist, the Mona Lisa was finished. The painting was certainly started by Leonardo Da Vinci. But it is not possible to say whether he himself finished the painting.
Like me Da Vinci is known for leaving things unfinished
@@annekabrimhall1059 what you have is called ADHD. But Leonardo, was on the spectrum, FYI
You’re certain? How can you be certain?
@@IcelanderUSer r u asking me?
@@yanina.korolko no.
Oooh i just started watching this, Art, Mystery, History, and Leonardo, what more is needed? Wonderful.
46:34 explaining Leonardo da Vinci with the Ponte Vecchio in the background is a feast for the eyes 😍 bravo
this old Art History major is enjoying the view
personally, i've never seen the mona lisa as this amazing piece of artwork. i'll admit, i've never seen it person so my opinion is just that, an opinion, but when i compare it to some of his other works, even drawings, i find them to be much higher quality.
Do you feel better for having shared that? It’s a funny thing, art. It’s entirely subjective. The Mona Lisa is serene, calming and beguiling - but you don’t think it’s amazing piece of art. I wonder if you paint and what you’ll contribute to civilisation.
I felt the same until I heard of the science behind it. But, I’m a science nerd. ❤
@@ah7910 Do you feel better attacking their personal opinion? Get down off your box, you look so silly being such a hypocrite. 🤡
am i not allowed to have an opinion? as i so stated first in my comment. maybe i'm the type of person who enjoys dogs sitting around a table playing cards as a composition. nowhere did i ever compare myself or my "contribution to civilization" against leonardo, but i do wonder, would have such a standard held upon you and your contributions? lol
@@ah7910
I have seen it… was almost alone in her gallery and I just didn’t get the hype.
Leonardo looks like Sean Connery at the beginning of The Rock 😄😄😄
I couldn’t shake that every time they showed him 😂
Lol I totally thought it was Sean Connery at first!! I was thinking this must've been filmed 24 years ago! 😂😂
A very fascinating film documentary. I love the detail of the history of these people.
Crucial, yet missing information?
The film contains a rather detailed discussion about missing eye lashes & brows from the Louvre Mona Lisa.
However, there isn't a single word on this topic regarding the other, unfinished painting.
This seems like a significant omission. In fact, without some declaration that the "unfinished" version DOES depict those features, the entire discussion seems quite pointless & irrelevant to me.
Anyone else have any thoughts, opinions or perspectives about this?
I noticed that too! Kept waiting to hear about the existing eyebrows and eyelashes on the newly discovered one. Maybe just maybe this i "Brought to you by the group of international investors who bought the 'copy' in 2008."
I think the reason why the unfinished version has the eyebrows and eyelashes on is because of the lack of varnish. The varnish was added as the last step of a painting back in those times, but people didn’t realise that over many years the varnish would yellow the painting. Restoration attempts were done where the varnish was re-applied, but it took the eyebrows and eyelashes with it.
Since the unfinished painting has no varnish, it’s better preserved and thus the eyebrows and eyelashes remain.
History of art is as fascinating as intriguing!!!! Is beautiful 👏
It was with him at the end of his life. I've read before that there are records of him having the painting with him whenever he relocated. And other mentions of him destroying one and starting over.
Yeah it's almsot impossible for a brash person like him to jsut make an artwork he probably destroyed a few mona lisa(s) one just happened to surviv eor one of his pupils saved a half finsihed one.
there is also a Mona Lisa by da Vinci in Prado, Madrid ;)
There are 10 or 12 of them all over the world ... And it has just started 🙂
The Prado version is mentioned in this video. It's the copy which has the most resemblance with the original. It's definetly a work that has been done side by side. Leonardo da Vinci may have touched that version, but it doesn't really matter. The Prado will never sell it and they have a lot of other important paintings.
The Isleworth Mona Lisa on the other hand is still in a private collection, so it may come to the market one day. Therefore it is much more interesting to speculate if it's an earlier version done by the master himself, if it is a copy done in his workshop or a copy from at later date. If it can be attributed to Leonardo da Vinci it can top the Salvator Mundi at an auction.
There is a lot of money to be made, not only for the seller but also for all the art experts.
It's not about the art itself or if it's really a good picture, it's just about the money. Documentations like this, which doesn't have a clear conclusion, help to keep public interest high and rise the price...
It's much .... cleaner than the one in the Louvre. I like it a lot, but I don't believe it is Leo's hand. The anatomy is not as sharp, and the colouring reminds me more of Raphael - perhaps a study by a Raphael apprentice?
The original Mona Lisa might not even be Da Vinci's doing tbh @@BrennanYoung
@@x0lct998 shots fired! 🤣
The Mona Lisa has always puzzled me. It may have represented the pinnacle of artistic technique of its era, yet I fail to find her portrayal appealing. To me, she appears quite ordinary and seems disinterested (I imagine she would be, if she indeed was a real person posing for the painting). Her fame and appreciation seemed minimal until the painting's theft in 1911. There are other paintings of women that I find far more captivating, such as "The Girl with the Pearl Earring."
Thanks for sharing your opinion.
Exactly! Humans have a problem with looking trendy, when the zeitgeist decides that a certain work is "amazing" suddenly everybody claims it's "amazing" for no reason other than me-too'ing and looking intelligent in the eyes of the equally ignorant.
Very interesting. My uncle was an artist,who painted prtraits and many temples in South India,going to those places. He would have been so very interested!
Your uncle sounds like a wonderful man. How lucky to have such a talented person in your family. Artists should be celebrated and remembered.
@@ah7910 oh,sadly he is no more.
An eerie new chapter in a story we all thought we knew.
Fantastic series DW! Awesome production!
These stories always end with , “gee I don’t know.”
It's my belief that, like some artists,, Leonardo was a procrastinator at certain times (most-likely when pressured by lack of time or lack of money).
He probably started the younger version within the same year as he was commissioned, but was unable to complete it in the manner he so wished.
As time passed, and both artist and subject grew older, Leonardo re-painted his subject on a fresh canvas by first using the original painting as the sitting subject, and then filling-in the altered details with a sitting of the lady herself (which would have been the appropriate way to do it. No need to sit through an entire sitting twice.)
Why no record?? Because they most-likely had an agreement of sorts, which did not include an exchange of money.
What’s the point of watching this program and we don’t have a clear cut answer if both paintings were the works of Leonardo.
One thing I question is: the background of the Mona Lisa is unfinished. I believe da Vinci intentionally left in this somewhat transparent blurred condition for two reasons..First the misty background focuses our attention on the face of the Mona Lisa. Secondly when they speak of Leonardo's later life focusing on subtle transparent glazes, that individual brush strokes are no longer visible and how important the revelation of misty-like light was in revealing form to him. I put forth the theory that he attempted to capture the misty background of the Mona Lisa (which is indeed very thin paint) in heavier, and therefore more stable, paint. And that, very misty quality, led him into further investigations. I must acknowledge that elusive background has always fascinated me, perhaps even more than the enigmatic smile on the portrait itself.
Da Vinci famously didn't finish paintings. He would start a portrait and then something else comes along and he would shift to something else. Even commissioned pieces were never finished.
It more has to do with making it so no matter where you look on the painting the rest seems out of focus so each place you look is a focal point
A great show about the 2 Mona Lisa's but it casually mentions for just a moment the 3rd one in Madrid. Wish it covered more of that to balance it out.
The Prado Mona Lisa is almost universally believed to have originated from Leonardo's studio, but lacks the subtle nuances of the master's own hand. Who precisely was the one that painted it is unknown, but it was most likely the same anonymous author of the so-called "Ganay" copy of the Salvator Mundi (also believed to be from Leonardo's studio) based on stylistic comparisons (in particular the way the eyebrows are rendered on both).
Since the mona lisa is not signed and there is no trace of a commission , how do we know she is even painted by da Vinci?
When I visited Shanghai in 2016, the second Mona Lisa was on exhibit there. It's very beautiful, and I got to spend more time than I could if I went to the Louvre. Only a few people were there so it felt like a private showing. Silly me, I should have taken a selfie.
Thanks for sharing this special memory with us.
Truly excellent program! In it I learned how the Master created the alluring effect of the Mona Lisa’s eyes following mine as I walked up to it when exhibited at the National Gallery of Art in Washington DC. Da Vinci achieved this thrilling effect by the repeated application of fine thin layers of the unique varnish he created to enhance the portrait’s eyes. Testimony to his genius and painstaking work. Viewing the old girl from a distance behind thick bullet proof glass at the Louvre today would be disappointing !
We're glad you enjoyed it. Make sure to follow us for the latest uploads 😊
I like the fact that the general population are in admiration in front of an Art piece. It brings an avenue of culture into the lives of average people. I do not share any emotion personally in front of that painting. I do admire,on the other hand, sculptures by Michelangelo, or paintings by Turner.
Fascinating! Thanks 🙏
I wasn't aware of the histogram evidence, and it's intriguing. In the same way that computer textual analysis has been able to untangle the authorship of Shakespeare's disputed works, this technique seems to hold the promise of untangling the origin of many disputed paintings. But then we hear the restorer claiming that the state of preservation of the Isleworth version is virtually impossible. It's all very confusing...
Histogram evidence shown in this documentary looks ridiculous, it's unclear whether they did actual quantative statistics on data or just ploted histograms and subjectively concluded that they look "identical". And how they can be identical if you can see by the naked eye that dominant colors on boring mona lisa and trippy mona lisa are completely different.
Its a bit strange that the 'identical' histogram evidence never raised argument that they might have been painted at the same time. Even assuming the paint recipes never changed over years you would get natural variation in the components you use. I can see Leonardo hitting on the idea of intending to do 2 or more to show passage of time ( 7 ages of man etc) and then dropping the idea when he realises how much work would be involved for a poor outcome. DNA analysis is now so advanced. Perhaps they have not considered that some spittle or dust could be preserved enough within the paint to link the two at some point in the future.
Great DW docu! Big thanks!
Lovely doc!!!!!!❤ thamks for this!!!! I like the fact that we may never know her secrets!!!!❤ I think it's supposed to be that way!❤
This video hinted at, but ultimately dodged the question of where MLII spent 400 years. Fine art authentication has, as one of its main pillars, the question of chain of ownership and custody from creation to present day. It seems highly unlikely that a fine portrait by one of the world's greatest artists, would spend 400 years entirely hidden, then show up unexpectedly in provincial England. If it existed for 400 years _somebody_ owned it, and surely at least _some_ of it's owners would have hung it on their wall. 🤔
Thanks for raising this very relevant question!
Thank you for your Exquisite presentation ❤🎉
Thanks a lot for watching and for your positive feedback. We appreciate you taking the time to comment and are glad you like our content!
My cousin Ray Ray got the 3rd one. Thrifted it during his European tour back in 1998.
These things are so precious and so at risk for loss as time goes by that anything created in the presence and studio of DaVinci should be considered just as important and as the work done by the master himself.
A genuine Mona Lisa mystery in 2024? Bah! And yet... incredible! Thank you.
New video but not new topic. The second Mona Lisa has been known about for a while.
All the opinions presented in this video, It seems to suggest that the Isleworth Mona Lisa is the also thr work of Da VInci especially considering the fact that Raphael drew a sketch of the Mona Lisa he saw at Leonardo's Studio with 2 columns, and Physicist John Asmus is 99% certain that the Isleworth Mona Lisa and the Mona Lisa at the Louvre were done by the same Artist
Amazing! Perhaps there are two paintings of Mona Lisa by the same artist Leonardo! He was a scientist after all experimenting with different glazes. I am a painter who has presented some paintings at the Met. in NY and an inventor with US Patents. I have sometimes used two of the same paintings with mixtures and glazes to see the outcome! Thanks to this information that I never knew existed. Victor Roland Vargas Mousaa
Honestly, if there was a recorded ten year difference in the time he was working on the Mona Lisa, I would believe that the second painting is just a painting he made of the same woman ten years earlier
In every painted portrait the presence of the painter appears, it can be clearly seen using the senses, not just the eyes. Those who authenticate a painting should definitely paint, to experience this, in my opinion.🎨🖌️
I feel Da Vinci drew young Mona first than in years, he finished her as we see her now as a matured woman.
i feel that Da Vinci used the Isleworth as a testing bed for new techniques when he was trying out canvas painting and the Mona Lisa was his finished piece after carrying it around for years
OR
the Isleworth was a copy by one of his students, if this is the case he might have used the Mona Lisa as a teaching base for students and workers, which would be why he carried it around for years
Leonardo was left-handed, surely his brush strokes will be a tell tale sign as if he had done any other Mona Lisas.
Hi! Don’t mean to sound harsh but wasn’t he ambidextrous if I’m not mistaken? I could be wrong but maybe it could be he painted with both hands! What a human!
I don't know@@KittyCatSpartan117 . But it's still something the researchers can check to narrow down the answer if Leo did paint the other ones.
@@KittyCatSpartan117 I believe that’s true, that he was ambidextrous.
He also painted upside down frequently
He used so many thin coats (30+) that brush strokes aren't visible
It is a myth propagated by the art market and academia that no one could ever paint as well as Leonardo, Rembrandt (etc etc). There are scores, if not hundreds, of people who can do so at any one time. Many artists have the fame they do merely because they were the first to paint in a certain manner - this never means that they are also the last who are able to do so.
Thanks for sharing your perspective on the matter!
Amazing info
It seems like going after each painting differently is great. The hint is having everything set up. The same gives less variables which may have irritated some other painters because of its consistency and therefore it couldn't recreate his work.
I'm certainly no art expert, but he mentioned that each artist had their own preferred recipes for mixing their pigment. Was Da Vinci's recipe not known? Could they not simply test a sample of one painting recipe to the other? Too simple? 🤔🤨
Unfortunately a bit yes. Paints were made by the artist each morning by grinding pigment and mixing them with eggs and oils. All of those 3 elements fluctuated. Every egg is chemically unique, every batch of hand pressed oil from oil seeds as well, the pigments come from different quarries. Some colours like black use coal, burned wood. Whatever was there left in the morning after the nights fire. In addition over 500 years change the organic chemicals depending on where the painting was stored. From that period, none of two paintings are chemically equal.
Chemical analysis as a method is only reliable for paintings not older than 100 years.
@@denkendannhandeln Thanks for sharing your insights with us and our community!
Proof it‘s fake: No eyebrows, no lashes. While both has been removed in early cleanings at the Louvre-ML, the other one hasn‘t been cleaned but is in perfect condition. Who would believe that Leonardo (or any of his lads) would ever have painted the picture of a woman and forget to add her brows and lashes. A joke.
Do you really think any painter of that caliber would “forget” eyebrows? Also, many of Leonardo’s subjects had no eyebrows or lashes. So that proof you’ve imagined is just your opinion. An art historian you are not.
I disagree. There are various times in history where the fashion was no eyebrows or eyelashes. That’s how sitters would want to be portrayed.
Scouse brows were not popular in those days 👀
Personally, I think the answer was answered in the early part of this video. Someone made the comment "it looks like a younger version of the subject of the Mona Lisa", and I think it was. Why not? Why wouldn't he choose to go back at a later date and try to recreate his earlier work just because? A lot of artist do just that. I would imagine the woman in the paint would have been more than happy to sit again for the painting, making it possible.
As for why the younger looking version is less ravaged by time, probably due to it being left with the subject of the painting, someone who would have cherished the painting and made sure there was little to no damage allowed, while the second painting was not for her but for Leonardo. Which means she or her husband probably didn't commissioned the second one, so Leonardo therefore kept it.
I mean the video points out that via forensic study, the paintings are almost certainly done by the same person, so Leonardo doing 2 paints of the exact same person, 20 years apart in the exact same setting makes perfect sense.
To me it looks like she’s trying to be serious but is young so she is about to break into a smile. Another way I’ve seen it is that she looks like she is smirking at you.
I can't prevent to feel the damage done to the Artwork being tested with scraping. 😢
Maybe Raphael painted the 2nd one?!
The Madrid Mona Lisa looks like the work of Raphael's studio to me
Mmm looks more like a Donatello
If you look at a lot of Canaletto Paintings,a lot of the people in the pictures of different locations have the same characters in them,which were painted by Canaletto's assista nts,so it wasn't just Leonardo getting others assisting him.
I still don't get why people find the painting so great..
Good point. It's the way she glows. Even as a quick work, her face is delicately boned and gently curved. Three dimensional. A sweet expression. A lot of people are spiritually moved by her. I feel the same about King Tut's death mask. Or a beautiful horse.
@@SandraNelson063 Rather that is the mysticism created by years of advertising that makes you think a certain way, it's is more people that felt underwhelmed that felt.overwhealmed
It is because of the mystery and story surrounds it.. that still theoretically of today.
@@neneriajeoraldz2824 as so many other paintings, he wasn't a bad artist at all, the portrait is good but as were solo many others of the Renaissance. People only theories with this one bc it was stolen and that's it, it's almost sure it was just a paid painting for a high class woman
It was stolen, so it must be great.
So nothing… we don’t know and that’s it. Bravo…
From way back when there were still fascinating and captivating science and history etc. programmes on TV with depth and real content presented by great hosts instead of the often very superficial, silly and dumbed down stuff that we are mostly getting these days 😊
to me it just seems like a demonstration of the difference in using a cooler palette (original) and warmer palette ('second' mona lisa). It would explain the brighter complexion on her face, youth, the nicer smile. Whilst the original seems grey and sad and aging.
Also, most aspects of the two paintings are very similar, such as the positioning of the hair, her pose, her garment, further suggesting that this was probably used to demonstrate and compare certain techniques and styles.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us!
and the cooler palette should have created a different histogram?
The Mona Lisa isn't even all that good... It's litterally just a painting but, people go crazy over it. Lame...
The work is impressive - especially considering it was made by a turtle!
😂😂
Painted at least 5 versions Myself. Can see two now without turning My head. My Best I call 'Mon Lisa'
Mano Lisa Is stupendous!
Leonardo painted portrait like works always using the camera obscura. To show Leonardo standing behind a canvas is incorrect. "Enlightenment" in art literally means "using sun light" and that was possible specifically when using the first photographic equipment developed - camera obscura. VERY IMPORTANT... and not in the video!!
Did Leonardo use modern paintbrushes? Come on DW if talking about a master of precision, at least apply some yourself as well! 10:10
i was just thinking the same thing...hahahaha
Thank you. It was very interesting.
"City of death" from the tom baker doctor who Era, makes it allll cleeaarrr.
I think 'Isleworth' is not Izzellworth, but 'Ailworth' or Eyelworth
Nope, the English pronounce it as he said, Eyezleworth.
Is that Sean Connery has Leonardo Davinci?
I think the tip of the nose is different, but that could be age.
No I don’t think so. When was this recorded? Connery died some years ago now. Is this old enough?
@@DawnDavidson - it wasn’t Connery; I added a comment fairly early in the video, but later saw the performer in a better light, and from different angles. He was younger, and although there was a modest resemblance, Sean it was not. Sorry about that.
Was there in the Musee Louvre looking at the painting just a week ago. The viewing distance from the Mona Lisa painting has increased significantly over the years. I didn't measure the distance but, belt type stanchion barriers are now keeping spectators at least 13 feet /4 meters away from the work. The wall that the painting hangs on now has been painted a darkish blueish color.
It seems odd to me that every image i see of the louvre version in reproductions, books etc look different, due to exposures colour rendering etc. Seeing it in the flesh close up to see what it really looks like would only be my purpose of seeing it for real.
Fascinating!
Breathless commentary! Dramatic music! I'm not a teenage boy. Actually I'm all grown up. In fact I'm too old for this juvenile presentation.
Good thing is you can leave without even commenting. Perhaps Jake Paul would suit you better.
Looking forward to your more adult version. Where can we watch it?
I'm afraid I had to look up on Wikiperia who this Jake Paul is - apparantly something called a "crossover boxer" whatever that is. American "culture" remains a mystery to the rest of the world but I'm sure he is a fine young man that loves his mother, but just maybe fine art is not his long suit. Or yours.@@IcelanderUSer
Well tracymoon, how kind of you to reply to my posting - I greatly appreciate it. Now in Europe we have an expression called " dumbing down" which, should you not know it, means reducing a serious and interesting topic into what will be comprehended by a teenage boy of limited intelligence. Would I be right in thinking that you are an American citizen? @@tracymoon4437
Factually, there are 3 Madonna della Rocca by Leonardo and the only one that is 100 % by his hand is tye one innthe National gallery
Factually, there are more than 3... 4 are being claimed nowadays, did you know?
Some sources say that Da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa up to 150 times, while others claim he only painted it a dozen times.
Incredible doc, congrats
We're glad you enjoyed it. Make sure to follow us for the latest uploads 😊
A 'second' Mona Lisa? Aren't there eight or so altogether?
Must watch this when I finish work.
there are at least 2, possibly more, works that da Vinci decided to approach
twice.
the Virgin of the Rocks.
St Anne with the Virgin and Child has two versions, one unfinished.
why not a Gioconda?
strong agree. This is notable circumstantial evidence IMO
Sean Connery, such an artist!
this was a surprisingly good watch
We're glad you enjoyed it. Make sure to follow us in order to not miss out in the future 😊
I'm Mona Lisa. I look just like her. I was so embarrassed growing up being told that. Mona Lisa is ugly. I've learned to love what I look like though. I wonder why I look so much like her.
We all come back until we don't have to. When I was first in the town in Wales my family is from I saw myself walking towards me.
You must be very capable. Her face says that she was.
Maybe you are related to her! What a fascinating story if so, is definitely do the search
8 degrees of separation. You are probably related. But do this for fun: take your high school yearbook and trade it for one the same year from a town or city 300 miles away. Do this exchange with a friend then start looking at the photos. You will find people in each other's books that look almost identical.
Mona Lisa is not ugly. You must have a sweet glow about you. A tender expression. People must be drawn to you. How can you be ugly?
How do I block this channel? This user releases false information and misinformation.
We'd like to hear what you disagree with :)
@@DWHistoryandCulture following
TLDR is there is no conclusive evidence for either. Just the other mona lisa looks too new to be 500 years old.
The lack of record of payment would be consistent with an incomplete painting.
The Prado's Levensbron may be another: context and size fit a now-demolished chapel in Brussels, where an exact replica survives, namely the EU Commission's Chapel on Rue van Maerlandt. Till Holger Borchert may be open to anyone interested in researching Jan van Eyck's diplomatic career.
You only thinks it's a masterpiece because you've been told what to think.
Exactly..!
It seems stupid to keep the Isleworth version locked up like that. It will just remain obscure and unknown. If it was loaned to a museum it would increase in value
Absolutely genuine
In the Isleworth version, she does look cuter in my opinion. The background of the picture, though unfinished, sits together well. Sorry Lisa, I choose your mirror.
I met Leonardo a few years ago. He's a nice guy.
What a very interesting video. I enjoyed it very much. Leonardo was so talented in so many ways. An artist, inventor, and possibly an author. Who knows what paintings are out there that we don’t know about that he had something to do with them.
We're glad you enjoyed it. Make sure to follow us in order to not miss out in the future 😊
Funny thing about the Mona Lisa, when I was growing up I remember a clear controversy over it, how she was not smiling and people really thought that was weird! Like any time you heard about Mona Lisa her smile was mentioned, or lack thereof I suppose. But now, she's smiling. Clearly. Easy to see. She's clearly smiling. It's not the Mona Lisa with a straight face that I remember.
Perfectly preserved majesty that needs no explanation really. He practiced and then perfected. Plenty of artists do.
Interesting stuff. 🖼🎨🖌
"stuff" is literally found inside a vacuum cleaner ...🤣😂
interesting da Vinci is painting on stretched canvas. The Mona Lisa (as described) was on a wood panel.
32:24 in Raphael’s drawing of the Monna
Lisa HE HAS CLEARLY DRAWN EYEBROWS… SUBSTANTIAL eyebrows…