Jenness Cortez Re-imagines the "Mona Lisa"
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 มี.ค. 2015
- After a year of scholarly research, internationally acclaimed artist Jenness Cortez announced her completion of a new painting that depicts Leonardo da Vinci’s “Mona Lisa” masterpiece as she believes it appeared at completion in the early 16th century. Commissioned by a private American collector, the Cortez work is said to incorporate several compositional elements from the recently restored Prado Museum copy.
Kudos to Ms. Cortez for presenting this reconstruction to help give an idea of what a beloved but overly familiar masterpiece once looked like. It is a shock and delight to see the Mona Lisa in such a rich technicolor manner but it also reminds me that our thoughts on Art History were wrong about Leonardo or Michelangelo preferring dark, shadowy forms with muted colors in their paintings. Far from it. They were every bit as interested in bright colors as any modern person. It was just the passage of time that led so many to mistakenly think they preferred watery, shadowy forms. This reconstruction of the Mona Lisa is almost like seeing her for the first time all over again. Thanks!
I have to admire anyone that attempts to restore the 'Mona Lisa'. As an amateur digital artist, I have been attempting to restore the Mona Lisa for 3 years, now. It seems I never stop finding new aspects to the painting. I really enjoyed your video and the information you supplied. Thanks!
D' Lynn it should be 5 yrs now , how it going ?
D' Lynn where she?? 🙄🙄
9 Years?
D' Lynn are you dead?
Ttmm Mmtt maybe dead
First of all, my sincere congratulations. The drawning of the face, its proportions, and the expression as well, are nearly perfection. See other attempts and the difference is remarkable. But such a work would deserve sfumato ...justly Leonardo’s landmark.
Amazing artist! Jeness, you have a wonderful gift. Thank you for sharing.
Probably the most accurate copy from Leonardo, but with new materials. Is beautiful well done !
This deserves more views. Beautifully done.
My Father is a landscape artist/oil painter in his mid 60's. I've always admired art history and the avant-garde of the art world. I love your in depth explanation and work done on this aged masterpiece brought to new life and light. Well done.
I’ve enjoyed everything about this video 👍
If you listen to this with earbuds it’s SO relaxing like ASMR
Her narration was superb.
Shows how badly it needs to be cleaned and restored
This is a very beautiful painting you have done a very good job with this!
More filled with colours and brighter I love your drawing my friend and I’ll promise you that I’ll subscribe😊
First of all, my congrats for the endeavour in making this piece and the extensive research around it. Also, it's no subject of discussion the hue , chroma, etc , due time and the odissey this painting suffered. I just have one question to do: where is the Leonardo's "signature" here? Where is the SFUMATO? It's just a question. Thanks
I love this painting not many people can understand it.
Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation
Fantastic work!
Great job! I myself have done a monalisa. Your became very great!
The effort to produce a painted rendering of the subject in an attempt to make it look like the original just after its completion has a value that a digital attempt at restoration cannot match because paint has depth and varying reflectivity that a digital print or view on screen cannot capture. This is marvelous work. I wish I could see it in person. The red in the sleeves is quite a different hue from the Prado copy made at the time Leonardo painted his original. The shade of red in the new painting looks to be close to raspberry while the shade of red in the Prado looks more like a muted scarlett, a touch closer to orange. How did you determine what shade of red to use considering how much has been lost in the original? Did you use cochineal? Have you made other versions of this painting and have you painted copies of other deteriorated paintings as they originally appeared? I love what you've done and I plan to see your work whenever I can.
I think this interpretation is amazing and, thanks to science, is a lot closer to how the original painting would have looked when freshly painted 500 years ago.
Her features are closer to the "Isleworth Mona Lisa" which appears to be an earlier version, or was perhaps the version Leonardo was reluctantly forced to give to his patron Francesco del Giocondo (Lisa's Husband) even though it was unfinished.
If I had a chance to view in real life all three paintings, I would view Jenness Cortez's Mona Lisa first, followed by the Isleworth Mona Lisa next and lastly the Louvre version.
The order of this list indicates most want to view, to least want to view.
I think the Cortez and Isleworth versions are much better paintings, with much more life in them than the Louvre one.
Thankfully we have multiple digital and film recordings of those two so the won't be lost to history.
The color is beautiful. The layers look a little "broken" ,that probably because of the turpentine quantities ,and not enough drying time. The strokes are visible,and not fully blended. So ,this looks very modern .
It needs more sfumato. Leonardo used approximately 30 layers of thinly applied paint to get the softness of her skin.
i don't think anyone could do what leonardo did in that painting....
Very good attempt to duplicate Leonardo’s Mona Lisa and beautifully done but no one could ever successfully duplicate the original because the original was painted with many layers of glazing, which only Leonardo knew how. The softness is missing. And the hands are too small.
Hey could you like shut up
@@nathanfritts4402 No need to be rude
Lack of "softness" due to carelessness in sfumato (something that CAN be achieved). Strange that hands are slightly out of scale: if the goal was a "reconstruction", then it would have been easy to project original's outlines onto a canvas/board (something I am guessing the lady did).
What book are you referring to? I would love to read up on the research done!
The Maestro painted two versions of Mona Lisa. The one in the Louvre is actually the second version believed to be painted in 1513. The first version, which is on canvas, shows Lisa appearing to be about 10 years younger than in the second version. I read about this a few years ago, the original version is called the Isleworth Mona Lisa.
Where can i find a book she mentioned much research had been done, and I am sure there good photos of this painting.
Do you sell prints of this?
Une copie de plus, très réussie cela dit. L'une des toiles la plus copiée au monde...
Very good
Very interesting.
And that’s why Masterpieces are best left alone….
Is that Bob Ross's girl friend🤔🤔🤔
Excellent copy! Like it was when first completed - as near as that can be envisioned!
sttgaegoaktd
Does no one realize all the first comments are looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong
Youre a marvellous artist that is without question and your achievement is very great. However your colours have not the translucency of the original plus for me she has lost that sweetness which leonardo was so great in expressing. So the colours you have used have greater opacity spoiling the sfumato technique and as someone has said some of your strokes are visible. But your efforts are highly commendable. You are very informed and insightful and you seem a very lovely person. I enjoyed your video.
I have done a new art on Monalisa. I have combined the Prado Monalisa and the original to make a unique art. Check it out here --->>> th-cam.com/video/_3VbqmvslCM/w-d-xo.html
Shes cool
Brushstrokes in original painting are very smooth. In Cortez's version visible unwanted brushstrokes. Leonardo worked with sfumato technique!!!
Although a good painting in its own right, it doesn't hold a candle against the original in its subtleties or tones
Lets try to tell baumgardner about the monalisa
Hi. If you care for Mona Lisa's Portrait. I want to tell you something about it .After deep study I reach to that , we can not see the Original of Mona Lisa's Portrait , unless we play in our visions , I mean via saying that, that we play in our looks in terms of the portrait .We can not see the main shape of it by a complete eyes , we try to close our eyes and see little and then step by step we start to open our eyes attentively (focusing on the Portrait by our eyes) .The hall must be dark the light only on the Portrait to focus carefully. By this way dear we can see the Original of Mona Lisa's Portrait. Why I don't tell you the Original of the Portrait, for I saw a person ,Who is he I don't know him indeed instead of Mona Lisa's Portrait.
YOURS SINCERELY
T.YASSER AUTHOR
U.OF ARTS
I. Like your. Mona Lisa better then. ...the original one ...
Completely different painting now.
Не красивая женщина на картине. Но нарисовано конечно классно
الاصبع هناك خطأ
с этой моной лизой как дурни со ступой ))
Pinte una mona lisa más bella cuando quiera se la muestro
for the love of god dont keep your mic so close to your mouth
Have to say she does not make sence with the red pigment on the sleaves, as you can see the same red used in the skin tones on the original painting. If the sleaves faded then the skin tone red would fade too, as there the same pigment?????. This is a good interpretation of her impression of the old masters but not an exact interpretation.
😐
hands are wrong
Wayne Farrell nope
Yes hands are different.
Any. Good artist could paint. The Mona Lisa.....but you did it better then he did ......he. Just painted it first......
Overrated painting.