It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Shadowflux
I didn’t have a solid opinion as to the sex of the John figure before I started, I now believe it to be a male because of the work I’ve done.
Yes, he used models for quite a few things and quite often, however, he did not use them in the same way artists these days use them.
He did not have 13 people seated at a table for years on end.
True, I’ve repositioned the face but I haven’t changed it, the measurements and proportions are still the same as you can see in the diagrams.
The difference between the male and female face in artistic proportions is quite subtle but very noticeable.
When compared side to side the females head is generally smaller but the distances between reference points is generally the same percentage as in the males.
As for the body there are many more differences.
Everything I’ve read has shown DaVinci to be a wise, rational, and deliberate man.
He was compensated quite well for works such as the Last Supper
I don’t believe DaVinci knew any special secrets about the story of Jesus.
If DaVinci painted a female into the last supper than I would think he did it as a joke.
Originally posted by Faust
Click here again :
Look above the first desciples head, the one to the left. Leonardo Da Vinci is a master painter and he has hidden the holy grail in textures in the wall. You can argue all you like that the figure is a woman, but the holy grail is not her, it's the chalice that is indeed in the painting.
More of what he perhaps meant in these characters is invested in their positions and relationships with one another. That's a big part of this period of art - you know this.
Originally posted by decidedlyundecided
So here we have my submission as an answer to the Mary theory of the Last Supper, in my "expert" opinion it is in fact a young male.
Well first off let me say that you did do a wonderful job doing the reconstruction. But having said that I must point out that you cannot prove your theory upon a subject by altering the original document. And how is it that you came to the conclusion that the mouth must be moved?
I would disagree with your half way assertion. I am more inclined towards the divine proprotion. Nose-mouth : Nose - chin, 1: 1.618
EdenKaia This is the painting, John the Baptist, also by Da Vinci. While this is obviously not the same John portrayed in the Last Supper, you can clearly see how Da Vinci would have depicted young males. The biggest question in my mind is, if Mary was truly the person depicted on the side of Christ, where was the last of the diciples, John? I only count eleven if you exclude this figure.
I am loving this debate, very interesting indeed!
When looking at the proportions of her/his face, you are assuming that her jaw is clenched. That would be the only time that you could really overlay the "law of four's or five's" or whatever your art teacher(s) chose to call it. Yes the human face has a predictable set of proportions under the pretense that the mouth is in it's closed position.
I am only assuming here but, it would appear that our mystery girl/guy is conversing with the person to his/her right. We could guess that his/her jaw may be open if this is true. Even if she is not talking to him, think about this, how much of the time do YOU have your upper and lower teeth together? When I am relaxed I don't think mine ever are.
OR I coulld be totally off and if that's the case I am starting a "Mary has an underbite and here's the proof" thread
Look above the first disciples head, the one to the left. Leonardo Da Vinci is a master painter and he has hidden the holy grail in textures in the wall. You can argue all you like that the figure is a woman, but the holy grail is not her, it's the chalice that is indeed in the painting.
Interesting analysis of the face. Now try it on the boobs.
Originally posted by Shadowflux
First, let me clear up the fact the it was I, Shadowflux, who did all the work, Decidedly is my girlfriend and I'm staying at her house right now, I forgot to sign her out and sign me in before I posted.
Secondly, let me say that I believe it is nothing more than people thinking it looks like a female. I assume you guys haven't taken any art classes or studied classical art, even if you have I'll write as if you haven't for those that haven't. DaVinci was an expert in human anatomy, he even states in his journals (which I have) that he endeavors to use models as little as possible and relies heavily on his knowledge.
In artistic anatomy there are rules, mostly geometric relations, for instance there is one eye width between both eyes. There are rules governing the length and size of every part of the human body.
This is not neccesarily a portrayle of a model, though he probably used models for some references.
Stalkingwolf: My basis for this assertion is natural human facial proportions, as you can see in my diagram I mapped out certain reference points on the face of the figure and compared their relation to eachother. The head is obviously tilted down, due to perspective this makes the mouth appear closer to the nose than it should be. As I said before, the mouth should be about halfway between the nose and chin. Since it was not half way between the nose and chin it needed to be changed to remove the downward facing perspective in order to view an undistoreted version of the face.
Craft: I actually had no hypothesis, I'm being impartial here and offering my "expert" opinion. I am a professional artist and graphic designer, this is my field of expertise so I thought I'd lend a hand to the discussion. If I were to have any hypothesis it would be more along the lines of Jesus having married, being the King of Judea as a political title, and the water to wine story being indicative of a wedding. However, I don't think DaVinci painted John as a female. I simply followed the rules of anatomy, perspective, and proportion to reach the final picture shown.
My theory in regard to DaVinci is that he was far more interested in science and the world around him than he was in mysticism, religion, or heretical conspiracies. The reason why he painted so many religious paintings is because of the time he lived in and because of who was paying him. Leonardo himself would tell you the same. He says in his journals "...there is a difference between work you get paid a lot for and work you get paid little for.." I'm paraphrasing of course lol
Originally posted by Shadowflux
Queenannie, I believe we're suffering from some form of misunderstanding. I don't understand why you feel the need to debate with me if we both agree that it is in fact a male.
I agree with you that it was quite scandalous...
I'm sure we've all seen the drawing he did of the perfectly proportioned man placed inside the circle.
You seem so sure that this is some great mystery surrounding this painting but there really is none, if you know how to read a painting from this era it is clear as day.
I don't understand why you feel the need to debate with me at every turn.
We both agree that it is a male, that it is John, not Mary in the painting.
If you don't like my technique or my experiment or my findings then that is a personal issue I suppose.
Originally posted by masterp
Even if John is Mary the Magdalene, does it change anything? it is a long known fact that Da Vinci was opposing christianity.
One man's works can not bring out the christian religion.