|
Post by SluggoZim on Aug 27, 2020 21:18:50 GMT -5
Not 'blank'. been working on this for months. best i can get so far, but not bad. Thoughts! Staring right at the dig spot at end of stem? i hope this settles the debate as to whether or not these types of sophisticated hidden items exist in JJP art. I have used these same techniques on Poussin and DaVinci works with startling results. DaVinci was a genius, polymath, master artist, etc. It appears he expressed both his artistic mastery AND massive intellect by including "stuff" (e.g. symbols, scenes, maps, riddles) in some of his art, hidden in plain sight.Yep, both Mona Lisas. for his own amusement? the Renaissance version of 'flipping the bird' as patrons admire the work. An invention? alien tech? or a great secret worthy of his attention? Why bring up DaVinci? I see the same obscuring techniques in JJP works. White, either as the primary or obscuring color. that is why i have more success by inverting the image colors. most recent inverted example is from early Mona Lisa sky background. ' v. d. ' is Latin abbreviation for ' He gave when Alive'. A DaVinci riddle? there are white obscuring spots over her heart and on the shoulder on that side. you can tell by the interruption of folds. need to go back and attack those again. onward.
|
|
|
Post by byrnietuney on Aug 28, 2020 1:03:28 GMT -5
Seriously, don't bother doing things like this, unless you have access to the high resolution scans of some (but not all) of the paintings that are floating about in various forums.
In the low resolution scans (basically, what you see in the book) you can convince yourself there are things there, that when you look in the high resolution scans, those things simply don't exist.
For example, in the low resolution of Image 3 the so called 'pear pad' looks like it has numbers and letters written in it - high resolution scan instead proves that it is not numbers and letters that are on it.
|
|
|
Post by choice on Aug 28, 2020 1:14:03 GMT -5
What is it? A chicken foot?!
|
|
|
Post by byrnietuney on Aug 28, 2020 2:53:20 GMT -5
Try this instead, it's the same, but a bit less pixilated; mysteriouswritings.proboards.com/post/47150/threadNot sure where xmarksdspot got that (resolution of Image 3) from. Notice also, directly under where the 'string' meets the 'spoon', there appears to be the same, or very similar, figure depicted although I'll admit in that case, it's a bit in the eye of the beholder. (Argueable). As to what it is - Quid Pro Quo. ---------- LATER EDIT: I am also going to add this provisio - we know that certain of the painting images we have seen, are of representations of the paintings in earlier stages of their development - to explain what I mean, we know that e.g. (Florida) Image 6 originally had a symbol that bore a close resemblance to Castillo de San Marcos, on its flag. We know that the final draft of Image 6, the draft that appeared in the book, had that Castillo de San Marcos-like symbol almost completely covered over instead with a round symbol. Therefore, I should allow that the picture I cited above from xmarksdspot, might instead be possibly an 'earlier stage' picture. If that's the case, that's interesting, because why would BP have made that particular change in Image 3 - some reasons I can think of is that that figure depicted on the'pear pad' , in that possible earlier draft, gave too much of an easy important clue OR gave a clue that was duplicated (I mentioned above that I believed that the figure "directly under where the 'string' meets the 'spoon', there appears appears to be the same, or very similar, figure depicted" [on the 'pear pad']). Hey! xmarksdspot, where'd you get that picture in your post that I cited above?
|
|
|
Post by choice on Aug 28, 2020 13:29:13 GMT -5
Actually that's a photo of the original painting I posted a link to in the I3/V11 thread here. It's the same image slightly expanded so more pixelated. And yes BP made slight mods to a few images before printing. Added clues or redacted some. These are not on the original paintings today so not stages of painting. They were made to proof images before printing. A major one to I3 is the red thin pen mark on the chest of the armor. Of course this is not on the original painting. So best hi-res scan of the original print book is available on 12treasures.com P.S. If you notice red and blue separations on the printed image, that's a telltale sign of Anaglyph 3D stereoscopic effect. So I used an old 3D red/blue filter glasses. It really pops!
|
|
|
Post by xmarksdspot on Aug 28, 2020 14:09:37 GMT -5
Try this instead, it's the same, but a bit less pixilated; mysteriouswritings.proboards.com/post/47150/threadNot sure where xmarksdspot got that (resolution of Image 3) from. Notice also, directly under where the 'string' meets the 'spoon', there appears to be the same, or very similar, figure depicted although I'll admit in that case, it's a bit in the eye of the beholder. (Argueable). As to what it is - Quid Pro Quo. ---------- LATER EDIT: I am also going to add this provisio - we know that certain of the painting images we have seen, are of representations of the paintings in earlier stages of their development - to explain what I mean, we know that e.g. (Florida) Image 6 originally had a symbol that bore a close resemblance to Castillo de San Marcos, on its flag. We know that the final draft of Image 6, the draft that appeared in the book, had that Castillo de San Marcos-like symbol almost completely covered over instead with a round symbol. Therefore, I should allow that the picture I cited above from xmarksdspot, might instead be possibly an 'earlier stage' picture. If that's the case, that's interesting, because why would BP have made that particular change in Image 3 - some reasons I can think of is that that figure depicted on the'pear pad' , in that possible earlier draft, gave too much of an easy important clue OR gave a clue that was duplicated (I mentioned above that I believed that the figure "directly under where the 'string' meets the 'spoon', there appears appears to be the same, or very similar, figure depicted" [on the 'pear pad']). Hey! xmarksdspot, where'd you get that picture in your post that I cited above? I just downloaded it from the net. I thought it was just a copy from the book.
|
|
|
Post by byrnietuney on Aug 28, 2020 14:45:22 GMT -5
Great! So we have quickly determined the answer to those possiblities I suggested, and the answer is; the picture xmarksdspot found is obviously derived from a higher resolution picture, which Choice gave a link to, and which does contain the figure depicted on the 'pear pad' (and directly under where the 'string' meets the 'spoon', there appears to be the same, or very similar, figure depicted) - but in the lower resolution pictures viewable, such as those from the book picture would be, e.g. on the wiki; thesecret.pbworks.com/f/1411675432/grid03.jpgthat area of the 'pear pad' does seem to have apparent markings that could be mistaken for numerals and letters - but those apparent number and letter markings actually don't exist. So, SluggoZim, Choice has helped to reinforce what I posted to you " In the low resolution scans (basically, what you see in the book) you can convince yourself there are things there, that when you look in the high resolution scans, those things simply don't exist." Choice, is there a high resolution copy of (New York) Image 12 that can be referred to for us to try and see if we can see what SluggoZim sees? And is there a high resolution scan of (Milwaukee) Image 10, so it can be stated what the object in the right border is? (rather than everyone guessing off a low resolution of that (which results in a corresponding resultant larger number of guesses as to what that is).
|
|
|
Post by choice on Aug 28, 2020 14:57:10 GMT -5
I haven't seen photos of the actual paintings of Milwaukee and Charleston. I was told JJP has them in hiding and he doesn't want photos taken from them. I suggest you try not to create friction in the forum with your I'm smarter than you attitude. So far you haven't offered anything useful only criticism. I'll wait and see if you share anything helpful that pushes thing forward or just irritation. We're already stock up on that. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by byrnietuney on Aug 28, 2020 15:14:59 GMT -5
(Shrug) No-one's offered me anything useful to me. (If xmarksdspot ever decides to check his PM's, that statement may change). Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by SluggoZim on Dec 17, 2020 11:38:17 GMT -5
still in blank area under the flower stem. My lines suggest a stone planter with an S shaped statue in front of it. The circled orb at top, right at the base of the stem in the planting bed. hope this helps. Looks like the first pictures of Mars from Viking lander decades ago. blurry, but features are there. where is it? sluggo
|
|
|
Post by SluggoZim on Dec 17, 2020 13:06:43 GMT -5
sorry, should have done a collage. This filtering really highlights the edges of shading to help discern angles, then shapes. Could be a stone planter, with mortar lines, and a bench on the right end. That curve looks pretty good. I am chasing the shading to figure out what is in foreground. In background, to left of planter, appears to be a seal or dolphin statue? Just the visible linear shading strongly suggests a place. onward.
|
|
|
Post by SluggoZim on Dec 18, 2020 10:40:32 GMT -5
Looks like there could be letters stuck into the planter. The last 3 are N G S ?
|
|