Hacker News Reader

Comment by TeMPOraL | Hacker News Reader

One thing I keep wondering about is how this squares with the fact that the Mona Lisa we all know is, most likely, not what da Vinci actually painted. There was this recent article:

https://www.npr.org/2012/02/02/146288063/painting-sheds-new-...

about a copy of Mona Lisa that was apparently done side-by-side with the original, and looks entirely different. The article implies it looks the way the original would be, if not for the layers of centuries old varnish covering it. Viewed side by side, the two paintings deliver completely different experience.

I've read a bunch of similar articles about other famous work of arts (temple frescos, Greek statues) - it seems that the old art we see today usually looks nothing like it looked at the time it was made.

View on HN

There's a fairly sensationalist TV show in the UK where art owners submit pieces they believe to have been misattributed works of note to a panel of experts who adjudicate (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01mxxz6 - Fake or Fortune).

By far my favourite bit is the restoration where they painstakingly remove the varnish that's been left to fester over the years. Obviously not easily done on the Mona Lisa but the difference is absolutely remarkable. That's actually another point that makes me disagree with the "value is in the craft" argument. Art is not static, it changes over time.

If you're interested, this episode has a great restoration, starting somewhere in the middle and revealed at the end: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv6m8aHAtTM

If you like restoration videos I'd recommend https://www.youtube.com/c/BaumgartnerRestoration

Great attention to detail and mastery, from what I can tell as someone who knows nothing of the subject!

> Viewed side by side, the two paintings deliver completely different experience.

They look nearly identical to me. It's just that the color balance is a bit different. You can apply a simple, smooth, monotonic, contrast change to the colors and change one into the other (except for the red shirt).

Different people respond to different aspects of art. To me, original Mona Lisa has always looked boring and somewhat depressing. The copy here is the opposite - it feels energetic, lively, content. Even if it's just the color balance that's the difference, I find it to be a huge one.

Between your perspective and mine, there's of course countless others - few paintings have had as much said and written about them as Mona Lisa. But, it turns out, most of those words were written not about what da Vinci painted, but what his work decayed into. It makes me view all those words in a completely different light.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com