Discussion in 'photography, graphics & art' started by Santino, Mar 26, 2018.
Is it odd that I find that first painting very disturbing but the second one not so much?
The first one...creepy eyes are frightening and he has a weird leery smile.
The second one...is someone crying and upset..maybe they saw the first picture and it upset them.
The eyes fail to follow one around the room though ...
IIn terms of ubiquity, I've seen prints/copies of J H Lynch paintings almost more than anything else over the last few years, e.g.
What's odd is that you're asking us why you think one is more disturbing than the other.
Lol...perhaps I'm just wondering
This was mentioned in a Chinese historical novel I'm reading, have to confess hadn't even heard of the (famous) painter Kramskoi and reading the Wiki entry it's got a lot of Mona Lisa-esque qualities; clearly well-known in Russia and China (working class character brings home a print in my novel) and the art world:
Portrait of an Unknown Woman - Wikipedia
No this is my favourite now.
Spoiler: it's big
Bless you Jon McNaughton.
who is the blue suit guy? another everyman character, or some repub buffoon?
"The Modern Christian" apparently.
I need one of those Excel quizzes with this so I can spend all day at work identifying the people in it.
I like the three stooges "y I oughta" motif but unimpressed that Stalin is towering over Napoleon.
OMFG I love you for doing that xx
Not really my cuppa, but seeing this in the flesh, the colours are extraordinary
I discovered Yves Tanguy last week.....
No offense, but I just kind of object to the default position that the Mona Lisa is the greatest painting of all time, and that we'd have to pretend it didn't exist in order to elect something different. And I'd be hard pressed to pick 1 painting out of everything available.
Don't be such a Grinch. How much of an excuse do you want to post a picture of a beautiful painting. When my daughter was a babe, she loved this; landseers dignity and impudence
That's not really the point of the thread though.
Is very, very different to:
That is one of my all time favourite paintings. You can't really compare it to the Mona Lisa, but it is a fucking fantastic painting.
In general response to the thread OP...
Leonardo had a couple up his sleeve. He would come First and Second without Mona Lisa, because he wasn't just genius artist, he was genius everything. He could sell his talent in his time. I think only Van Gogh comes close. He may come closer in 300 years time, or he may be left further behind. Da Vinci took the gig whilst it was available, and I doubt very much if anyone else in the next Millennium will get even close.
Yes that is phenomenal in the flesh
Another vote for Turner from me.
It just struck me again how truly amazing the internet is...we are so used to it now that the awe is partly gone, but to be able to see any famous painting you want, in the time it takes to type or say it's name is really great.
That's so very true. Most Dali I've seen have been truly awesome when you are standing in front of them. The size makes you wonder how he managed to conceive and produce them. I couldn't single out any one as above the others.
One Hopper I especially like has no impact until you see it. The finess of the art, the life and movement, his work depicting the effects of light on the subject, are all utterly amazing. You don't get this overwhelming effect until you are in front of it.
I'll never forget being totally blown away by the Carravaggio exhibition at the National several years ago. I was so captured by the paintings that I thought I'd buy the book but absolutely everything that made them great was lost in reproduction.
Separate names with a comma.