Starting in 2007 this blog documents the multiple attempts to write a book about Leonardo da Vinci, with random thoughts and posts along the way. In early 2016 I finally gave up (or in?) on that and it was the most free'ing decision I've ever made. Maybe i'll go back to it eventually but now i'm able to focus on my other passions. The things I wanted to do "Once I finish, someday." I learned what I didn't like and what didn't work. Now it's time to figure out what I do want and what does.
The Last Supper Pre vs Post Restorations
The pre-restoration was made by merging multiple photographs of it then that image was auto-aligned with the post-restoration image. Interestingly the computer was not able to auto-align the pre and post paintings (It requires 40% of the images being a match) but I was able to manually align the post and pre and combine them with 50% transparency - and then use that image to auto-align the two originals.
That goes to show how different the painting looks even after about 20 years not to mention what it would have looked like 500 years ago. It’s like having the same connect the dots coordinates but other artists - and time - have painted over - replaced - took off - and then reinterpreted the internal images quite a bit - but also leaving the edges of the puzzle pieces mostly intact.
Getting two photographs of the Last Supper to align like this without a computer’s help would be very difficult without taking pictures of them from the exact same spot with the exact same camera - very difficult to achieve with decades between. Leonardo was aware of this problem and designed his paintings to be viewed from a specific spot to avoid distortion. Interestingly he was also the first to realize that this distortion could also be used for artistic effect and it became known as Anamorphosis. Or in other words you can draw something that can only be properly seen from a specific perspective.
The most famous of which is by Hans Holbein the Younger - The Ambassadors - where there is a skull included in the foreground.
The shining is one of those movies that the people who only see it once won't appreciate. If you go into hearing that 'it's scary' you'll be disappointed. It's not your typical horror movie. It's not your typical - movie movie. It's just weird in a way that is hard to put your finger on. It's a movie with a lot of layers.
It's an example of a weird type of paranoia- questioning- is there a hidden meaning or isn't there? Are you just reading too much into it and seeing things or was it intentional? This is also a great example in that it definitely has some hidden meanings but also brings some vagueness since the director is dead and can't verify if they are his intention or coincidence or just accidental.
The idea that he filmed the hallways and blueprints of the hotel being 'impossible' is definitely true. It invokes a type of sub-conscious confusion in that we realize there is something 'wrong' with the orientation but…
I've been thinking about how each animal seems to have it's "ivore" - opposite. Or a herbivore/ carnivore opposite. Almost as if each type of animal divided into two different types and with each comes almost universal characteristics not just shared between the two similar species but all of the herbivores/ carnivores and even more interestingly- omnivores.
This made me think of humanities place within this potential contrast.
For example a Panda bear exclusively eats bamboo (Herbivore) and a Polar Bear exclusively eats Meat - they can probably eat some vegetables (saw them eating carrots in a zoo) as well but their natural diet is almost all meat. A Panda could also probably eat some meat but the idea is they are definitely more one or the other. Another dividing factors isn't just "will eat meat" but will actually hunt or kill an animal to get it. There are a lot of animals that could or would eat meat if it was in front of them but wouldn't eve…