Mona Lisa's Twin Painting

Comments

February 2, 2012 at 10:24 am

(1) Beth Peterson says:

How absolutely fascinating!! Can you imagine being able to paint side by side with such a master? Although…. in reality Leonardo would have probably driven me nuts, LOL.

February 2, 2012 at 2:27 pm

(2) Yover says:

Here is the proof that it is impossible to faithfully copy the masterpiece of Da Vinci, even if this twin version indirectly gives us an idea of some true colours of the original painting . But where is in the “twin” version the mystery of Da Vinci’s painting? The local colour of the figure here is predominant whereas in Da Vinci, lights and shades go beyond and so they are completely supernatural, out of time and therefore so bewitching.
I imagine the wonderful Raphael copying the painting…
http://www.wikipaintings.org/en/raphael/portrait-of-a-lady-with-a-unicorn-1506

February 2, 2012 at 3:09 pm

(3) Marion BE says:

I found myself going back and forth between photos of the two paintings, wondering if it’s familiarity with the famous one that adds appeal, or what there’s that seems lacking in the newly revealed one…

February 2, 2012 at 5:45 pm

(4) Yover says:

When I compare the two paintings, I observe in Da Vinci that
- the forehead is higher and so more majestic
-the line of the neck is harmoniously curved
-the line of the neckline not so sloping
-the cheeks not so elongated
-the eyes are more “smiling”
-the chin sharpened
-the fingers more relaxed
-the shadows on the face lighter and more transparent
-the landscape not so abruptly shared in two colours burnt sienna and blue
-at last, she is more enigmatic than the second one.
Nevertheless I admit that the facial expression of the latter weirdly looks more modern.Two different ideal canon of feminine Beauty, the Master closer to the ancient ideal of formal beauty (a very well balanced face) and the pupil unconsciously well ahead of his time?

February 3, 2012 at 4:55 am

(5) Yover says:

(Da Vinci was certainly more lenient to his pupils…)
When today I look at the copy I realize the outline of the brain is more egg-shaped, The inner angle of eyes looks very close to the bridge of the nose. the left nostril is very small. The right forearm seems to fall in the left side of the canvas ( the right arm is leaning too but in another manner on the chair than the left arm ), so the right forearm looks excessively elongated ( the same phenomenon in Ingres feminine figures but the latter was aware of the subtle distortions he created and we can find his influence on Cezanne, Modigliani and Picasso !) . The landscape on the right side seems raised so the forehead does’nt dominate the painting anymore. In the original, thanks to the difference in height we can imagine a waterfall in the distance behind the face which to me is suggested by the slightly vertical outline of the neckline. This “virtual” waterfall could suggest that “the time goes by”. These impressions have disappeared in the copy.