The faces are exceedingly like the uncanny early AI-generated smears.
It really does. But we are assured by experts that the painting is by a master.
London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
31–40 of 66 posts
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#32I can't help but think it's a waste of money, how many paintings of Mary and ugly baby Jesus do you need?
I'm not downvoting you, because this is a common economic misconception, and I'm sure your opinion is shared by many. Money is never wasted. While the long explanation is some what technical and boring, the short version is this; "Money is neither created nor destroyed, it simply moves from one hand to another". Put another way, the National Gallery had 20 mil to spend. So they spent it. That 20 mil us now in the eco…
Mind sending me all your retirement savings? I'll even give you a pretty sweet drawing for it. It wont be money wasted[1]; I'll be sure to use it well.
[1] not sure how much you will be able to sell said sweet drawing for nor when, but by definition, it will be worth it.
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#33Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#34Ugh. It looks like an early AI hallucination produced while trying to generate religious art in the style of the Iron Maiden's Dance of Death album cover (possibly the ugliest album cover ever).
This thing? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dance_of_Death_(album)
It's like a PS one game cd cover. I instantly knew it was released in the early 00's just by glancing it.
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#35It makes me sad that Londons fabulous (and free) galleries have warehouses full of masterpieces that they have no space to display, yet my local museum has a gallery with not a single decent painting. I wish more of those great works could be shared around.
The Victoria and Albert museum is about to open a new building in Stratford, which is a public storeroom. https://www.vam.ac.uk/east
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#36Original headline: "London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m" The artist is literally unknown, not just "not yet famous", which is how I first read the HN headline. It's centuries old.
Oh yes maybe my fault, I meant unknown as really unknown, not “less famous”.
Note that articles should be submitted with the original title:
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#37Original headline: "London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m" The artist is literally unknown, not just "not yet famous", which is how I first read the HN headline. It's centuries old.
AFAIK it's not at all uncommon for artists of old paintings to be unknown. Especially for religious paintings like this. (if anything it's the default)
For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_the_Golden_Altar
Wikipedia even has a list listing many 'Master of X' artists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Anonymous_artists
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 20 million could have been used to help many more people than a single family though. But if I understand correctly it's not taxpayer money
"But if I understand correctly it's not taxpayer money" How does that work (I'm not in the the UK)? Donations perhaps?
From the article: “ The Virgin and Child with Saints Louis and Margaret and Two Angels was bought for just over $20m (around £16m at the time), funded by the American Friends of the National Gallery London.”
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
The seller now has 20 million to spend. The money just moved from A to B.
Most likely they will not be spent, rather they will be put into some fund with the only observable effect of further increasing financialization.
That is a very broad generalization. Even if it was 'put into some fund', that equates to a capital investment which can be used to deliver value elsewhere.
Money is complicated - the only way in which I would see it get truly wasted is if you took it out as cash and burnt it. Even then you'll be (marginally) raising the value of all other money left in the system.
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#40Looks pretty normal until you look at the bottom. Wow.
That's just their pet dog. What do you mean, yours doesn't look like that?