PDA

View Full Version : First copy of Mona Lisa painted by Leonardo da Vinci's student unveiled!


Larapink
01-02-12, 21:55
First copy of Mona Lisa painted by Leonardo da Vinci's student unveiled - and in this one she looks younger and more ravishing.



New painting also reveals model had sculpted eyebrows
Madrid museum discovers the replica in its vaults
Officials say it was painted by Da Vinci's apprentice - alongside the artist as he did the original


http://i42.************/15xvekl.jpg
Different perspective: The copy gives art lovers and experts a chance 'to admire the Mona Lisa with totally different eyes'

The earliest copy of Leonardo da Vinci's masterpiece, Mona Lisa, has been found in the vaults of a Spanish museum, looking younger and more ravishing than the original.
Art historians have hailed the discovery made during conservation work at the Prado Museum, as one of the most remarkable in recent times.
Museum officials said it was almost certainly painted by one of Leonardo da Vinci's apprentices alongside the master himself as he did the original.

http://i42.************/5d3vao.jpg
Replica: Painted alongside the original (left), historians say the copy (right) gives another insight into what the model for one of the world's most famous paintings actually looked like

http://i40.************/zvr02t.jpg
Rare discovery: Employees of Madrid's Prado Museum stand next to the authenticated contemporary copy of Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa

It is not the Mona Lisa, but you might think of her as Mona Lisa's sister, who - after more than five centuries - is finally having her debutante party.
Painted alongside the original, historians say it gives another insight into what the model for one of the world's most famous paintings actually looked like.
The copy has been part of the Prado collection for years but officials said they did not realise its significance until a recent restoration revealed hidden layers.

The artwork features the same female figure, but had been covered over with black paint and varnish.
Two years ago, to get the copy ready for a da Vinci exhibit to be held in Paris this year, tests were done and restorers discovered something hidden under the black coat.
When the black covering was removed, a Tuscan landscape very similar to the one in the original emerged.

http://i39.************/29x80ar.jpg
Unveiled: The copy has been part of the Prado collection for years but officials said they did not realise its significance until a recent restoration revealed hidden layers

The Prado painting was long thought to be one of dozens surviving replicas of the masterpiece made after Leonardo's death but it is now believed to have been painted by one of his key pupils, Francesco Melzi, working alongside the master.
Prado's technical specialist, Ana González Mozo, said: 'It is quite possible that Leonardo's assistant met Lisa and may even have been present when she sat for the master.
'She may also have come to the studio when finishing touches were being applied to the face in the painting.'

Ms Mozo said the underdrawing of the Madrid replica was similar to that of the original, which suggests both were begun at the same time and painted next to each other, as the work evolved.
The Louvre original, displayed behind glass, is obscured by cracked darkened varnish, making the woman appear middle aged. Because of its fragility, cleaning and restoration is thought to be too risky.
But art historians believe the Prado's Mona Lisa which is in the process of being painstakingly stripped of a dark over-paint reveals her as she would have looked at the time- as a radiant young woman in her early 20s.
Miguel Falomir, the Prado's director for Italian painting, said the copy gives art lovers and experts a chance 'to admire the Mona Lisa with totally different eyes.'
Besides the black background, one other difference from the original is the woman in the copy has eyebrows and the Mona Lisa in the real masterpiece does not.
There are dozens of the surviving replicas of the masterpiece from the 16th and 17th centuries.
The sitter is generally believed to represent Lisa Gherardini, the wife of the Florentine cloth merchant Francesco del Giocondo and is thought to have been painted between 1503 and 1506.
After five hundred years, the two versions will be reunited again later this year.
The Prado plans to put it on display later this month before it travels to the Louvre for the da Vinci show, giving specialists and visitors the first chance to compare the two works.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2095047/Mona-Lisa-copy-painted-Leonardo-da-Vincis-student-unveiled-Madrid.html#ixzz1lAkLIOVL


I have always been inspired by Leonardo Da Vinci as an artist his artwork never ceases to amaze me. What an amazing discovery this is! :tmb:

Rai
01-02-12, 22:12
Well that's very interesting. I think I'm misunderstanding something here though. The restorers think that this painting, presumably done by Leonardo's apprentice, was painted at the same time as the 'original'. How can it be a copy then? You'd have two artists working on seperate paintings of the same model with very similar landscapes. The difference is, it was Leonardo's painting that got discovered and became so famous. Technically it's not a 'copy' then surely. I wonder why it's taken so long for this one to be discovered.

I actually prefer the 'copy'. Possibly because of its preservation allowing the colours to appear brighter now, but I just prefer the detailing on this one. But then, I'm neither an artist or an art critic, so what do I know? :p

TRLegendLuver
01-02-12, 22:19
How neat! I hope (I doubt it) that a Da Vinci art expedition will come over to the United States some time. History and art. Doesn't get much better than that. :tmb:

patriots88888
01-02-12, 22:35
Impressive! I'm really blown away by this. Thanks for posting. :)

TheRCroft
01-02-12, 22:35
Wow, what an amazing discovery! I'm with Rai, I prefer the "copy".

Larapink
01-02-12, 22:45
Well that's very interesting. I think I'm misunderstanding something here though. The restorers think that this painting, presumably done by Leonardo's apprentice, was painted at the same time as the 'original'. How can it be a copy then? You'd have two artists working on seperate paintings of the same model with very similar landscapes. The difference is, it was Leonardo's painting that got discovered and became so famous. Technically it's not a 'copy' then surely. I wonder why it's taken so long for this one to be discovered.

I actually prefer the 'copy'. Possibly because of its preservation allowing the colours to appear brighter now, but I just prefer the detailing on this one. But then, I'm neither an artist or an art critic, so what do I know? :p
There is a definite resemblance in Mona's face in the first portrait. The word copy the article is using it as loosely as possible.

I prefer the original one then the one we know famously. There is something more vibrant to the first painting, that I prefer too.

You're thoughts are welcome, you don't need to be an artist to appreciate artwork and notice things about it. :) :hug:

How neat! I hope (I doubt it) that a Da Vinci art expedition will come over to the United States some time. History and art. Doesn't get much better than that. :tmb:
I don't know if you're going to be annoyed at me when I say this but I am going to visit the Da Vinci Art exhibit at the National Portrait Gallery in two days time, I have been looking forward to seeing his masterpieces first hand for the first time it's going to be a great experience. Yes, I'll take some pictures, if I am allowed to, you know how art galleries are like sometimes!

I agree History & Art nothing better than that, in the world! :tmb:

Impressive! I'm really blown away by this. Thanks for posting. :)
Exact same reaction I had when I read this article.
Prego! (You're Welcome) :hug:

Wow, what an amazing discovery! I'm with Rai, I prefer the "copy".
Indeed, I agree. But I also love the more famous version too! :tmb:

Gracious Days
01-02-12, 22:54
Wow, cool find. But since the copy was in a museum vault I assume at one point it was well known that there were two Mona Lisas, then it gets lost and everyone forgets about it. :confused:

I think the apprentice made her face appear more youthful, like she actually was, but I give my respect to both of them. :tmb:

Encore
01-02-12, 23:36
What an epic finding!!!! :yik:

Leonardo's version is far more intringuing and beautiful IMO but this is an incredible piece of art history.

Well that's very interesting. I think I'm misunderstanding something here though. The restorers think that this painting, presumably done by Leonardo's apprentice, was painted at the same time as the 'original'. How can it be a copy then? You'd have two artists working on seperate paintings of the same model with very similar landscapes. The difference is, it was Leonardo's painting that got discovered and became so famous. Technically it's not a 'copy' then surely. I wonder why it's taken so long for this one to be discovered.

I actually prefer the 'copy'. Possibly because of its preservation allowing the colours to appear brighter now, but I just prefer the detailing on this one. But then, I'm neither an artist or an art critic, so what do I know? :p

I assume it's considered a copy because the person painting was learning from Leonardo. So it'd basically be like, your art teacher doing a commissioned work, but allowing you to sit next to him and do your version as well so you could learn from it. I don't think they used the word "copy" in the derogatory meaning we now so commonly attribute to it.

sandygrimm
02-02-12, 06:43
Looks better than the original :cool: more colors! much clearer

Spong
02-02-12, 06:47
[quote]http://i40.************/zvr02t.jpg
Rare discovery: Employees of Madrid's Prado Museum stand next to the authenticated contemporary copy of Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa

Someone needs to tell the people in that picture to cheer the hell up.

EscondeR
02-02-12, 06:57
Sorry, but I won't buy that. Definitely a fake.

It doesn't look like a da Vinci apprentice's work... if you understand what I'm about :mis:

remote91
02-02-12, 07:39
Having seen and been disappointed by the original, I definitely prefer the copy :p

Zelda master
02-02-12, 08:16
The "copy" truly is the better looking version :p

patriots88888
02-02-12, 12:30
What an epic finding!!!! :yik:

Leonardo's version is far more intringuing and beautiful IMO but this is an incredible piece of art history.

I assume it's considered a copy because the person painting was learning from Leonardo. So it'd basically be like, your art teacher doing a commissioned work, but allowing you to sit next to him and do your version as well so you could learn from it. I don't think they used the word "copy" in the derogatory meaning we now so commonly attribute to it.

I have to say that it makes me wonder if the original was by da Vinci or if it was his apprentice who actually painted it. It's not beyond the possibility of that anyways... especially when considering how most seem to prefer the newly 'found' version. On the other hand, maybe the original is favored by those who prefer that simply for the reason that they believe da Vinci was the artist behind it. Something to ponder anyways.

lord gaga
02-02-12, 13:01
The copy looks nicer but it looks "modern" while the real one looks old school. I have my doubts this was painted at the same time as the first!

Sir Croft
02-02-12, 13:03
I like the colors in the copy, they're more varied and easier on the eyes than the original ones.

Someone needs to tell the people in that picture to cheer the hell up.
:vlol:

[Xmas]
02-02-12, 13:31
I like the colors in the copy, they're more varied and easier on the eyes than the original ones.I agree.

The colors in the original version are so washed out :/

lcroft_lc
02-02-12, 13:33
The one in "The Da Vinci Disappearance" DLC of ACB was better looking. :)


Someone needs to tell the people in that picture to cheer the hell up.
:vlol: :vlol:

They are actually saying "who among us is looking like the one in portrait?" :p

Scorpio1991
02-02-12, 13:44
I prefer the original, and the copy doesn't look it was done in the same time period as the original...