So, I know nothing about art, quite literally, but I can look at David and think it is beautiful.
What do actual artists think? Is it really incredible? Are the proportions correct? Is the posture awkward? Is it intricate in its design? Does it require mastery to create?
I guess the same question applies to a lot of works.
>>2419275
the david is great, the mona lisa is shit and it's a real shame that the davinci name simply carries it to famedom.
>Is it really incredible?
I think it's definitely one of Michelangelo's best works, and he was an exceptional artist, although he was fond of saying "If you knew how hard I worked for my mastery, it wouldn't seem so wonderful at all."
>Are the proportions correct?
'Correct' is perhaps the wrong word; everybody has irregular proportions to some degree. The irregularities of the proportions on display in David are a good case study in the representation of the personality in the composition of the figure. Pay attention to the size of his hands and head, for instance--these elements are said to give him a sense of power and intelligence, although that's a subjective point that reflects contemporary interpretations of the character David.
>Is the posture awkward?
This kind of pose is something called "contrapposto" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrapposto]
>Does it require mastery to create?
I mean, just imagine starting with a block of solid marble, going at it with a chisel for a while, and ending up with that. Find a high resolution image so you can get a closer look, and it'll be more clear.
>>2419275
Michelangelo gave his pieces such a nice finish, that's personally what I like the most about them.
The pose is so nice it transmits to you how heroic it is supposed to be, and is dinamic, while we're at it.
The anatomy is good and the proportions, while being a bit exaggerated (hands and head, usual of michelangelo) is done in purpose.
Personally he's one of my favorite sculptors (tho I like the pieta even more)
>>2419311
I think the problem with the Mona Lisa is that DaVinci lived in a time when the popular painting styles that dominated the art world in Europe all sucked. His drawings and writings were amazing, but his paintings are all flat, static, saccharine glurge.
>>2419347
Say that to my face and see what happens faggit.
Seriously thought, Da Vinci IS overrated.
>>2419351
Say what to your face? That Da Vinci's drawings and writings show a depth of technical skill and understanding that was clearly inhibited by the style he was trained to paint in, that was in demand at the time?
If you believe that Da Vinci is overrated as a painter, then I fail to see what is controversial about that claim.
>>2419275
>Is it really incredible?
yes
>Are the proportions correct?
no, but that's intentional. it was meant to be installed on top of a building and thus seen from below, so the proportions are distorted to accommodate.
>Is the posture awkward?
No, contrapposto is the opposite of awkward. The gaze is pensive though.
>Is it intricate in its design?
what?
>Does it require mastery to create?
fucking obviously
>>2419319
See, I heard the head and hand were so large because of the context it was originally intended to appeal - on top of building
>>2419311
Mona Lisa is a great portrait, has great facial expression and how she is turned towards the viewer with her hands in front is almost like she is interacting with the viewer. That smirk of hers is so pleasant but so hard to capture in a painting.
who did it better?
>>2420032
Donatello
>>2420032
Disgusting and brutish. Doesn't have an ounce of Michelangelo's nobility.
>>2419347
It's not fair to judge Leonardo based on paintings like that which isn't even painted by him, but by a student or follower. There is however a painting by a close student of his that I have seen in person, the which is in excellent preservation (probably the closest we could get to Leonardo's true vision of color), and I say it's one of the most beautiful paintings I've seen although still made by a lesser hand than Leonardo's.
And many of the painting styles of late 1400s and early 1500s are probably among the best to have been and will ever be. Besides, Leonardo's style is the start of a new type of painting.
>>2420024
not sure if youre trolling, but assuming you arent, look at her shoulder/neck anatomy a bit.
>>2420032
>Comparing Baroque vs Renaissance
>>2420953
What about it?
>>2420155
Shredder
