| Welcome to Into Infinity. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Smile is in the Eye of the Beholder | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 4 2009, 01:41 AM (37 Views) | |
| Cody | Nov 4 2009, 01:41 AM Post #1 |
Seeker
|
The secret behind Mona Lisa's enigmatic smile The secret behind Mona Lisa's enigmatic smile has been explained by scientists who believe it changes depending on which part of the eye sees it first. By Richard Alleyne, Science Correspondent Published: 1:41PM GMT 28 Oct 2009 One of the charms of the world's most famous painting is that she appears radiant one moment and then serious and sardonic the next. Now scientists claim to have come up with an answer to her changing moods - our eyes are sending mixed signals to the brain. Behind the scenes of The Day the Earth Stood StillThey believe Mona Lisa's smile depends on what cells in the retina pick up the image and what channel the image is transmitted through in the brain. Sometimes one channel wins over the other, and you see the smile, sometimes others take over and you do not see the smile. Different cells in the eye are designed to pick up different colours, contrasts, backgrounds and foregrounds. Some deal with central vision while others with peripheral. Depending on what cells picks up the image first depends on what channel they are sent to the brian for interpreting. These channels encode data about an object's size, clarity, brightness and location in the visual field. "Sometimes one channel wins over the other, and you see the smile, sometimes others take over and you don't see the smile," said Dr Luis Martinez Otero, a neuroscientist at Institute of Neuroscience in Alicante, Spain, who conducted the study, told New Scientist. To get a fuller picture of the reasons behind Mona Lisa's vanishing smile, Dr Martinez Otero varied different aspects of the Mona Lisa that are processed by different visual channels, and then asked volunteers whether they saw a smile or not. To start with, the duo asked volunteers to look at the painting in varying sizes from varying distances. They found the closer you were the more likely you were to see the smile. Next, Dr Martinez Otero's team compared how light affects our judgement of Mona Lisa's smile. Two kinds of cells determine the rightness of an object relative to its surroundings - "on-centre" cells, which are stimulated only when their centres are illuminated, and allow us to see a bright star in a dark night; and "off-centre" cells, which turn on only when their centres are dark, and allow us to pick out words on a printed page. Dr Martinez Otero jammed these channels by showing another set of volunteers either a black or white screen for 30 seconds followed by a shot of the Mona Lisa. The black would mute off centre cells while the light on-centre. Volunteers were more likely to see Mona Lisa's smile after they had been shown the dark screen, leading Martinez Otero to conclude that it is these the on-centre cells that sense the Mona Lisa's smile. Eye gaze also affects how volunteers see the smile, Martinez Otero says. His team used software to track where in the painting 20 volunteers gazed while they rated whether or not Mona Lisa's smile became more or less apparent. With a minute to gaze at the painting, volunteers tended to focus on the left side of her mouth when judging her as smiling – further evidence that dead-centre vision picks out the smile. When volunteers had only a fraction of a second to discern her smile, their eyes tended to focus on her left cheek, hinting that peripheral vision plays a role, too. So did Leonardo intend to sow so much confusion in the brains of viewers, not to mention scientists? Absolutely, Martinez Otero contends. "He wrote in one of his notebooks that he was trying to paint dynamic expressions because that's what he saw in the street." The research was originally presented at the Society for Neuroscience's annual meeting in Chicago. This isn't the first time scientists have deconstructed Leonardo da Vinci's masterpiece. In 2000, Margaret Livingstone, a neuroscientist at Harvard Medical School with a side interest in art history, showed that Mona Lisa's smile is more apparent in peripheral visionMovie Camera than dead-centre vision. LINK |
|
"Some people can learn by watching others. Some people can learn by reading books. But most people just have to pee on the electric fence for themselves!" ---Will Rogers | |
 |
 
|
| Cody | Nov 11 2009, 03:55 AM Post #2 |
|
Seeker
|
Leonardo fingerprint reveals $150 million artwork AP - Wednesday, October 14, 2009 8:19:24 AM By ROB GILLIES Mona Lisa has something new to smile about. A portrait of a young woman thought to be created by a 19th century German artist and sold two years ago for about $19,000 is now being attributed by art experts to Leonardo da Vinci and valued at more than $150 million. The unsigned chalk, ink and pencil drawing, known as "La Bella Principessa," was matched to Leonardo via a technique more suited to a crime lab than an art studio -- a fingerprint and palm print found on the 13 1/2-inch-by-10-inch work. Peter Paul Biro, a Montreal-based forensic art expert, said the print of an index or middle finger matched a fingerprint found on Leonardo's "St. Jerome" in the Vatican. Technical, stylistic and material composition evidence -- including carbon dating -- had art experts believing as early as last year that they had found another work by the creator of the "Mona Lisa." The discovery of the fingerprint has them convinced the work was by Leonardo, whose myth and mystery already put him at the center of such best-sellers as "The Da Vinci Code" and "The Lost Symbol." Biro examined multispectral images of the drawing taken by the Lumiere Technology laboratory in Paris, which used a special digital scanner to show successive layers of the work. "Leonardo used his hands liberally and frequently as part of his painting technique. His fingerprints are found on many of his works," Biro said. "I was able to make use of multispectral images to make a little smudge a very readable fingerprint." Alessandro Vezzosi, director of a museum dedicated to Leonardo in the artist's hometown of Vinci, Italy, said Wednesday he was "very happy" to hear about the fingerprint analysis, saying it confirmed his own conclusion that the portrait can be attributed to Leonardo with "reasonable certainty." "For me, it's extraordinary there is confirmation" through the fingerprint, although "it's not like I had any doubt," he said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. Even before the fingerprint discovery, Vezzosi said several experts agreed with his conclusion, which was based on "historical, artistic, stylistic (and) aesthetic" considerations. Based on its style, the portrait has been dated to 1485-1490, placing it at a time when Leonardo (1452-1519) was living in Milan. Canadian-born art collector Peter Silverman bought "La Bella Principessa" -- or "The Beautiful Princess" -- at the gallery in New York on behalf of an anonymous Swiss collector in 2007 for about $19,000. New York art dealer Kate Ganz had owned it for about nine years after buying it at auction for a similar price. One London art dealer now says it could be worth more than $150 million. If experts are correct, it will be the first major work by Leonardo to be identified in 100 years. Ganz still doesn't believe it is a Leonardo. "Nothing that I have seen or read in the past two years has changed my mind. I do not believe that this drawing is by Leonardo da Vinci," Ganz told the AP on Wednesday. She declined to comment further. Silverman said he didn't expect Ganz to acknowledge it's a Leonardo because that would damage her credibility, adding that if she wants to "go against science and say the Earth is not round," then that's her prerogative. "Thank God, we have the fingerprint because there will still be those doubting Thomases out there saying it couldn't possibly be and giving all sorts of reasons for it. We not only have a fingerprint, but a palm print." He said the palm print was found in the neck of the portrait's subject, who is believed to be the daughter of a 15th century Milanese duke. Biro said the two main ideas to emerge from the news are the discovery of "an important lost work by Leonardo," and how "science, technology, scholars and art historians are learning to work together to solve these incredibly complex puzzles." Silverman said the Swiss collector first raised suspicions about the drawing, saying it didn't look like 19th century artwork. When Silverman saw it at the Ganz gallery in 2007, he thought it might be a Leonardo, although the idea seemed far-fetched. He hurriedly bought it for his Swiss friend and then started researching it. "Of course, you say, 'Come on, that's ridiculous. There's no such thing as a da Vinci floating around,'" Silverman said. "I started looking in the areas around da Vinci and all the people who could have possibly done it and through elimination I came back to da Vinci." Last year, Silverman asked Nicholas Turner, a former curator of drawings at the J. Paul Getty Museum and the British Museum. Turner said it was a Leonardo. Silverman described the Swiss collector as a very rich man who has promised to buy him "lunch and dinner and caviar for the rest of my life if it ever does get sold." Vezzosi said the portrait seemed to be of a prospective bride and compared its purpose to today's photos of clients of Internet matchmaking agencies. As for the possibility of finding other Leonardo works, "there are thousands of lost works of Leonardo, mainly pages from codexes or drawings," Vezzosi said, but discovering a lost or undocumented painting would be "much more difficult." LINK |
|
"Some people can learn by watching others. Some people can learn by reading books. But most people just have to pee on the electric fence for themselves!" ---Will Rogers | |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Art · Next Topic » |
4:23 PM Dec 4
