8 ms·
Is It a ‘5’ or a ‘6’? The Answer Could Make an Art Fortune
- dajonker 7y agoIf you need an easy way to bypass the "login" wall, just click the "reader view" icon on Firefox (and probably Safari).
- manderley 7y agoOr press the pause button before the page finishes loading.
- tyingq 7y agoMissing all but the first picture, but all the text is there: https://outline.com/26TYrk https://outline.com/26TYrk
- tummulfingur 7y agoBlocking javascript also seems to work, but only the first image will be shown.
- rambojazz 7y agoFor me in Firefox this hack works only by hitting F5 after entering "reader view".
- throwaway744678 7y agoDirect link to the picture [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/11/27/arts/00venus5/merlin_164332665_b5521880-e2ed-49ad-a9d4-473a55740684-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/11/27/arts/00venus5/mer...]
- IshKebab 7y agoPretty clearly a 6.
- dagav 7y agoIt could just as easily be a 5 considering the "bulb" isn't connected
- remarkEon 7y agoIt's definitely a 5. I would expect that they'd use the same tool to cast the '9' as they would the '6' (just turned 180 degrees), and the character in question pretty clearly has a different angle connecting the "bulb" to the "feather" than the '9' in the year.
- matt-attack 7y agoWorks on iOS safari using reader mode.
- JohnTHaller 7y agoIt's a 6 that the owner wants to be a 5 so it's worth more.
- dna_polymerase 7y agoIt's a 5, look at the 5 below, same number. Also it's carved if it was a 6 there would be a visible notch.
- abrowne 7y agoClose-up: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/11/27/arts/00venus7/merlin_164332638_f2263b3e-fd38-4c07-910a-8f2ea0ac84bc-superJumbo.jpg https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/11/27/arts/00venus7/mer... The 5 below has an extra rightward-facing part on the top that the 5/6 doesn't And then why does it say it was made in Stockholm?
- dna_polymerase 7y agoAh this picture makes it more clear. Odd 6 though.
- bobloblaw45 7y agoIt looks to me like it was a 5 but realized he was running out room.
- matt-attack 7y agoYes but you can clearly see the etcher cares about kerning. You see how he crammed the the 5/6 right into the 9 to its right? To really get them to snuggle together it’s reasonable he would have adjusted that notch in the top of the 5.
- mc32 7y agoThe curve on the 5 tapers off, that same hook on the 6 does not. It looks more like a six to me, but I can see how it might look like a five but without the top cross.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- PhasmaFelis 7y agoI'm always bemused that art aficionados seems to care much more about provenance and prestige than about the art itself. Whether this piece was made by a revered master or a no-name should have no bearing on whether it's "clunky" or "exquisite." If it's a copy rather than a wholly original work, I can see that affecting the perception of its uniqueness, at least. But I've seen discussion of "rediscovered" paintings from masters that are worthless if they turn out to have been original work from a different artist, even though the quality was good enough to fool professional appraisers.
- dec0dedab0de 7y agoI think that is the Terrezano's effect. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwCQDbzBerI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwCQDbzBerI
- jonahrd 7y agoThink of it this way. Say you were trying to piece together the life story of Stephen Hawking. You'd be happy to come across an unknown/unpublished paper of his, which would be a new plot-point to demonstrate his intelligence and talent in a specific way that was previously unknown. Sure, it may not be his best work. It may not even be that different from other work going on at the same time. But because we are interested in Stephen Hawking's story specifically, it would still be a very valuable piece to keep track of. If you later found out it was an imposter's paper, it would be worthless.
- lisper 7y agoThat's not at all comparable. The value of art is purely subjective. The only reason we're interested in (say) Giambologna at all is because his art has some ineffable subjective quality that the art of his competitors lacks --better "aesthetics" (or whatever you want to call it). So if you can't tell the difference between a Giambologna and an Arglebargle based on its aesthetics, what difference does it make whether it's a Giambologna or an Arglebargle? It's like arguing over whether Shakespeare's plays were really written by Shakespeare or by someone else with the same name. The reason we're interested in Hawking has nothing to do with aesthetics, it has to do with science. The original works of a scientist may be of historical interest, but they are of no scientific interest. The reason we're interested in Hawking in the first place has nothing to do with the details of his original works, whereas the reason we're interested in Giambologna has everything to do with it.
- sojmq 7y agoDon't worry, there is a patch for that http://www.snakebytestudios.com/projects/mods/diablo-2-mods/#fixedfont http://www.snakebytestudios.com/projects/mods/diablo-2-mods/...
- mcphage 7y agoOh man, I wish I knew about that back in the day...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- mself 7y ago6
- croisillon 7y agototally a 5
- neonate 7y agohttp://archive.is/AX6RU http://archive.is/AX6RU
- manicdee 7y agoGiambologna 1529–1608 In 1597 the artist would have been 68. In 1697 he would have been 168. What is actually the topic of debate here? Surely not whether this bronze casting was created by this artist?
- tmearnest 7y agoOh man, finally a use for that network I trained on MNIST!
- hakfoo 7y agoLook at the coinage of Elizabeth I for an unambiguous contemporary example. The top sections of the "5s" vary substantially-- some are nearly square, some are an obtuse angle which looks not that far from this figure. The Arabic numbers took a long time to standardize-- you were still seeing the weird early "4" that looks like the nodern one tipped back 45 degrees not that much earlier.