5 ms·
To be honest, the lamb pre and post restoration do only look vaguely similar. This does not only look like a simple refresh of paint, but rather like somebody p
by prennert 5y ago
To be honest, the lamb pre and post restoration do only look vaguely similar. This does not only look like a simple refresh of paint, but rather like somebody painted a caricature. Quite obvious is that eyes and ears are in different places and angles, who knows what else was changed subtly during the "restoration"
- snaily 5y agoThe explanation is right there in the article, and it does not involve your supposed modern day hubris: Restorers found that the central panel of the artwork, known as the Adoration of the Mystic Lamb, had been painted over in the 16th Century. Another artist had altered the Lamb of God, a symbol for Jesus depicted at the centre of the panel. Now conservationists have stripped away the overpaint, revealing the lamb's "intense gaze" and "large frontal eyes".
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- CorrectHorseBat 5y agoCalling it a "restoration" is an insult to professionals who have spent years working on the painting. Any changes to the painting (there are indeed more than just the lamb) were actually painted over during the 16th century. What you see now is the original and what you think is the original is actually a 16th century cover up.
- masklinn 5y agoSeeing the original I can understand the cover up, the original looks nothing like a lamb, and doesn't look like the usual human-headed animal, it's just disturbing.
- Igelau 5y agoLook again at the pre-restoration lamb. You can actually see the original ear on the right (viewer left) side of the lamb's head through the cover-up. More obvious in this picture: https://twitter.com/frajds/status/1219125000550199301 https://twitter.com/frajds/status/1219125000550199301