I updated my blog post to additionally include left/right mirrored images for the cleaned state of the painting before restoration, for the infrared photo, and for my own restoration/recreation. You can see the results here: artofericwayne.com/2023/09/22/no-the-salvator-mundi-is-not-a-split-androgynous-image/ I'd also like to apologize if I seem dismissive of people's ideas and theories about the painting. While I am quite confident in my own argument based on some really strong facts about the damage to the painting, I am not completely dismissing other people's inquiries, insights, hunches, and research.
Thank you for doing this, I appreciate it. I am no expert, just someone who paints and has a life long in interest in fine art. I am not normally inclined to weird or convoluted interpretations but think the differences in this warrants further conversation and analysis. As an aside you have uploaded some very interesting ideas on your channel - long may it continue.
It’s interesting to wonder about how your approach to digitally restoring this image could actually be a very important tool for restorers. I really like your restoration. My one comment would be that it almost looks too symmetrical or rather more symmetrical than the unrestored version.
As a watcher of Baumgartner restoration, the Kitsch movement and a fan of Leonardo, the subject of androgyny in Renaissance painting is new to me. Still to me it seems a bit of a wash and a stretch for Da Vinci to be pulling an androgynous move. Someone very deliberate in his cartooning and detailed would not attempt a wonky mix of the figure like that. And from his sketches of Salai, it would seem inconsistent.
Great video, would love to see more videos where you apply your skills to other paintings for which cleaned and restored pictures are available. Thank you for your great work!
Just found your channel. And yes it was this video. I thought it was AMAZING! Keep doing you! I am traveling Japan from Canada and was looking for long videos to upload during travel days. Your humor, info and skills entertained me the entire time! Do more please! Kudos! ❤
I hope that flight wasn't too long! Even though I've been making videos over a span of several years it somehow surprised me when people watch them, especially the longer ones. I can't quite imagine anyone watching my videos through a flight. So glad you found them interesting and entertaining enough to go the distance. Thanks for sharing that story!
Having just watched your main video on this painting, I agree with you that it’s very thorough, balanced and scholarly, although the way in which it is presented is not that normally associated with scholarly work! I think linking the painting with the Mona Lisa was a master stroke in the sales pitch, not only because of this most famous of portraits’ cultural status but because so much of its true character has been hidden by time. Both have luminous, hazy faces and a lot of dark areas. Perhaps that association plus the witching name of Leonardo and the lure of exclusivity was sufficient to condemn the poor, battered painting first to a vault in Geneva and now to the deserts of Arabia!
Having read Ben Lewis' book 'The Last Leonardo" a while back I have been intrigued by this painting. Whilst I don't think that the image of Christ is androgynous as such I believe it may be even more interesting. Commentators have said that the face in the painting is either poorly executed (which would rule out Leonardo or his workshop) or wrongly restored. Instead of using a mirror on an image of the restored painting (which for obvious reasons differs from the damaged original) try it on the infra-red images of the original painting instead. Lewis' book has numerous plates of the unrestored painting (2005), cleaned (2006) infrared (2007) and partially and fully restored. The image appears to be two separate and individual portraits (not the same sitter/person) one with distinctly male features and one female. The eyes are different shape and sizes, cheekbones distinctly different and differing jawlines. In other words, two portraits in one, not an androgynous Christ. Why an artist would wish to this I cannot know but then again I am not Leonardo. Please check the infra-red, Eric, I would be interested in your thoughts.
Thanks for the comment and suggestion. I have now updated the blog post to include left/right mirror images for the infrared photo and the cleaned version of the painting (also my own version before someone suggests it). artofericwayne.com/2023/09/22/no-the-salvator-mundi-is-not-a-split-androgynous-image/ I'm not persuaded by the results. The main reason is that the head just does not split cleanly into two halves because it is not entirely symmetrical using a vertical axis, in which case the results are always awkward. If the results were enticing, I would latch onto that nugget and run with it, because I like unexpected things and unveiling new vistas of reality. Personally, I don't see anything persuasive, but I am not rejecting the idea outright. It does seem an impossible project for the master to have undertaken as it would be a recipe for failure. Check out my blog post if inclined. I do like you idea of two different people, one male and female, based on different sitters, as opposed to an imaginary male/female version of the same person. Even if that is not at all the case, it's a fresh idea that never occured to me. Same as you, I can't imagine why Leonardo would attempt something like that, which I'd think would be a recipe for failure. Have a good one.
I like to watch videos on the Salvator Mundi being a scandal, but I like them because the art people mostly are so grown up and well spoken. Don't bring the level down to a fight in the school yard. But I like your work!
There was a beard. So don't look at the jaw, it wasn't visible. The beard has covered partly the corners of the mouth, so expect the mouth to be disturbed, looking like pentimento today. The upper paint layers, the finish, seem to be cleaned away or have lost saturation over time, so some of the info has been lost for good.
To be fair, Leonardo seems to have been privy to ancient esoteric information about consciousness that was kept secret from the masses. Portraying Christ with a combined masculine and feminine face would seem to indicate Leonardo trying to express this knowledge through the nonduality of Christ. Meaning, Leo's sending a message that says: becoming Christ-like (aka, becoming conscious) requires one to combine the masculine and feminine aspects of one's psyche. This "sacred marriage" is what transformed Jesus into Christ. He showed men what they must do to become conscious: he embraced his feminine side and awakened. The same way women must embrace their masculine side to become whole/conscious/awakened. If this doesn't make sense to you, it's only because you haven't studied esoteric history/wisdom/nonduality. That's ok, most people haven't. Most people misunderstand the sacred marriage. Most people see the world through what they've been told about Jesus, rather than understanding the deeper (hidden/lost/unremembered/esoteric) meaning of Christ. The truth about Christ. The conscious-bringing aspect of Christ. (I have NO idea what people online are saying about androgyny I didn't look into it. I assume, like with most things, they're wrongly misinterpreting the painting as having something to do with gender or sex on the physical plane. - Precisely BECAUSE they're unconscious. So they don't understand the nondual nature of gender/consciousness on the psychological/emotional/spiritual plane.) My point is, if this WERE a da Vinci... It might be a coded message about consciousness. (To mirror the face as two masculine or feminine featured sides is to see men and women in a dual way... Meaning: as if men had only masculine and women had only feminine aspects of psyche. We know full well men feel emotion and women can use logic. So I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying there's more to the story than you realize.) *Oh, and I really loved your previous video about the errors in the repainted piece.
I don't object at all to any of your theories about androgyny and spirituality. People are claiming that Leonardo deliberately deliberately painted one half of the face to look like a woman's face, and the other half to look like a man's. They are not saying the figure is seamlessly androgynous. In this video I showed that the reason the head is asymmetrical and that the two sides don't match is because of 500 years of damage, overpainting, and restorations, and not because one side is supposed to be female. Check out a series I did called "Selfies From Alternate Universes" in which I depict myself as male, female, different ages and races, and also transcending death: artofericwayne.com/category/selfies-from-alternate-universes/ Oh. I almost forgot to thank you for watching my videos and leaving a positive comment on the long one. Good luck to you.
If you learn more about Leonardo,you wouldn't do such things. If you like photoshopping pictures, you're welcome, but "the are more things in heaven and earth,Horatio..."
You Tube suggested your earlier Salvatore Mundi video, probably because I watch some painting restoration videos.
I updated my blog post to additionally include left/right mirrored images for the cleaned state of the painting before restoration, for the infrared photo, and for my own restoration/recreation. You can see the results here: artofericwayne.com/2023/09/22/no-the-salvator-mundi-is-not-a-split-androgynous-image/ I'd also like to apologize if I seem dismissive of people's ideas and theories about the painting. While I am quite confident in my own argument based on some really strong facts about the damage to the painting, I am not completely dismissing other people's inquiries, insights, hunches, and research.
Thank you for doing this, I appreciate it. I am no expert, just someone who paints and has a life long in interest in fine art. I am not normally inclined to weird or convoluted interpretations but think the differences in this warrants further conversation and analysis. As an aside you have uploaded some very interesting ideas on your channel - long may it continue.
Thanks. Much appreciated. I enjoy exploring these ideas together.
It’s interesting to wonder about how your approach to digitally restoring this image could actually be a very important tool for restorers. I really like your restoration. My one comment would be that it almost looks too symmetrical or rather more symmetrical than the unrestored version.
Well, the unrestored version is the damaged version.
As a watcher of Baumgartner restoration, the Kitsch movement and a fan of Leonardo, the subject of androgyny in Renaissance painting is new to me. Still to me it seems a bit of a wash and a stretch for Da Vinci to be pulling an androgynous move. Someone very deliberate in his cartooning and detailed would not attempt a wonky mix of the figure like that. And from his sketches of Salai, it would seem inconsistent.
Great video, would love to see more videos where you apply your skills to other paintings for which cleaned and restored pictures are available. Thank you for your great work!
Just found your channel. And yes it was this video. I thought it was AMAZING! Keep doing you! I am traveling Japan from Canada and was looking for long videos to upload during travel days. Your humor, info and skills entertained me the entire time! Do more please! Kudos! ❤
I hope that flight wasn't too long! Even though I've been making videos over a span of several years it somehow surprised me when people watch them, especially the longer ones. I can't quite imagine anyone watching my videos through a flight. So glad you found them interesting and entertaining enough to go the distance. Thanks for sharing that story!
Having just watched your main video on this painting, I agree with you that it’s very thorough, balanced and scholarly, although the way in which it is presented is not that normally associated with scholarly work! I think linking the painting with the Mona Lisa was a master stroke in the sales pitch, not only because of this most famous of portraits’ cultural status but because so much of its true character has been hidden by time. Both have luminous, hazy faces and a lot of dark areas. Perhaps that association plus the witching name of Leonardo and the lure of exclusivity was sufficient to condemn the poor, battered painting first to a vault in Geneva and now to the deserts of Arabia!
absolutely love your work !
Having read Ben Lewis' book 'The Last Leonardo" a while back I have been intrigued by this painting. Whilst I don't think that the image of Christ is androgynous as such I believe it may be even more interesting. Commentators have said that the face in the painting is either poorly executed (which would rule out Leonardo or his workshop) or wrongly restored. Instead of using a mirror on an image of the restored painting (which for obvious reasons differs from the damaged original) try it on the infra-red images of the original painting instead. Lewis' book has numerous plates of the unrestored painting (2005), cleaned (2006) infrared (2007) and partially and fully restored. The image appears to be two separate and individual portraits (not the same sitter/person) one with distinctly male features and one female. The eyes are different shape and sizes, cheekbones distinctly different and differing jawlines. In other words, two portraits in one, not an androgynous Christ. Why an artist would wish to this I cannot know but then again I am not Leonardo. Please check the infra-red, Eric, I would be interested in your thoughts.
Thanks for the comment and suggestion. I have now updated the blog post to include left/right mirror images for the infrared photo and the cleaned version of the painting (also my own version before someone suggests it). artofericwayne.com/2023/09/22/no-the-salvator-mundi-is-not-a-split-androgynous-image/
I'm not persuaded by the results. The main reason is that the head just does not split cleanly into two halves because it is not entirely symmetrical using a vertical axis, in which case the results are always awkward. If the results were enticing, I would latch onto that nugget and run with it, because I like unexpected things and unveiling new vistas of reality. Personally, I don't see anything persuasive, but I am not rejecting the idea outright. It does seem an impossible project for the master to have undertaken as it would be a recipe for failure. Check out my blog post if inclined.
I do like you idea of two different people, one male and female, based on different sitters, as opposed to an imaginary male/female version of the same person. Even if that is not at all the case, it's a fresh idea that never occured to me. Same as you, I can't imagine why Leonardo would attempt something like that, which I'd think would be a recipe for failure.
Have a good one.
It's just a painting. Highly unlikely to be from life.
I like to watch videos on the Salvator Mundi being a scandal, but I like them because the art people mostly are so grown up and well spoken. Don't bring the level down to a fight in the school yard. But I like your work!
There was a beard. So don't look at the jaw, it wasn't visible. The beard has covered partly the corners of the mouth, so expect the mouth to be disturbed, looking like pentimento today. The upper paint layers, the finish, seem to be cleaned away or have lost saturation over time, so some of the info has been lost for good.
@@mazolab but the copy of the painting has a beard too.
@@mazolab Hollar copy is best
@@mazolab the closer you look the more it reminds you of Mona Lisa. Especially the contours of the eyes.
To be fair, Leonardo seems to have been privy to ancient esoteric information about consciousness that was kept secret from the masses.
Portraying Christ with a combined masculine and feminine face would seem to indicate Leonardo trying to express this knowledge through the nonduality of Christ. Meaning, Leo's sending a message that says: becoming Christ-like (aka, becoming conscious) requires one to combine the masculine and feminine aspects of one's psyche.
This "sacred marriage" is what transformed Jesus into Christ. He showed men what they must do to become conscious: he embraced his feminine side and awakened. The same way women must embrace their masculine side to become whole/conscious/awakened.
If this doesn't make sense to you, it's only because you haven't studied esoteric history/wisdom/nonduality. That's ok, most people haven't. Most people misunderstand the sacred marriage. Most people see the world through what they've been told about Jesus, rather than understanding the deeper (hidden/lost/unremembered/esoteric) meaning of Christ. The truth about Christ. The conscious-bringing aspect of Christ.
(I have NO idea what people online are saying about androgyny I didn't look into it. I assume, like with most things, they're wrongly misinterpreting the painting as having something to do with gender or sex on the physical plane.
- Precisely BECAUSE they're unconscious. So they don't understand the nondual nature of gender/consciousness on the psychological/emotional/spiritual plane.)
My point is, if this WERE a da Vinci... It might be a coded message about consciousness.
(To mirror the face as two masculine or feminine featured sides is to see men and women in a dual way... Meaning: as if men had only masculine and women had only feminine aspects of psyche. We know full well men feel emotion and women can use logic. So I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying there's more to the story than you realize.)
*Oh, and I really loved your previous video about the errors in the repainted piece.
I don't object at all to any of your theories about androgyny and spirituality.
People are claiming that Leonardo deliberately deliberately painted one half of the face to look like a woman's face, and the other half to look like a man's. They are not saying the figure is seamlessly androgynous. In this video I showed that the reason the head is asymmetrical and that the two sides don't match is because of 500 years of damage, overpainting, and restorations, and not because one side is supposed to be female.
Check out a series I did called "Selfies From Alternate Universes" in which I depict myself as male, female, different ages and races, and also transcending death: artofericwayne.com/category/selfies-from-alternate-universes/
Oh. I almost forgot to thank you for watching my videos and leaving a positive comment on the long one. Good luck to you.
If you learn more about Leonardo,you wouldn't do such things. If you like photoshopping pictures, you're welcome, but "the are more things in heaven and earth,Horatio..."
BA HA HA HA HA. You need to learn more about art and reality.
@@artvsmachine unfortunately,we have different teachers of reality,my friend🤗
I'm my own teacher.