3 ms·
The statues were obviously carved by expert artists but these "specialists" would have us believe they were subsequently painted by half-assed amateurs. It fai
by mikkupikku 11mo ago
The statues were obviously carved by expert artists but these "specialists" would have us believe they were subsequently painted by half-assed amateurs. It fails the sniff test so badly, that trolling is a reasonable conclusion. You don't put that much effort into making something only then let some unskilled intern ruin it by covering up all your work with a flat coat of primer and leave it at that.
- smallnix 11mo agoUnlike the article, your comment, does not provide evidence beyond "sniff test". The article brings up paintings of statues, which is an interesting data point.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- mikkupikku 11mo agoIf somebody tells you there's a dragon outside, you'd need to be stupid to ask for evidence.
- nyeah 11mo agoMeh. Nyeah? "Trolling" is a reasonable hypothesis but not a reasonable conclusion.
- mkoubaa 11mo agoNot amateurs, artists. Look at any modern art and you'll understand that looking like crap is kind of the point nowadays
- mikkupikku 11mo agoLook at the statues themselves, its obvious that these people valued realism.