5 ms·

I don't trust this for one bit. For the owners there is quite the incentive to label this as the work of a genius. But in reality, this is just pretty complex

by smokel 9mo ago

I don't trust this for one bit. For the owners there is quite the incentive to label this as the work of a genius. But in reality, this is just pretty complex for a 12 year-old to produce by yourself. Edit: as others have pointed out, and if I were to actually read the article carefully before commenting, the composition is not attributed to Michelangelo. So it is just a copy. Quite the achievement, but possible for a twelve-year old. I once confronted a gallery owner who was proudly presenting a newly discovered work by Mondriaan [1]. An original black and white photo in an old newspaper [2] was shown as proof of authenticity. But many details such as the creases in fabric differ in the original and the new painting. No OpenCV required to see that. Mind you, the picture is already framed with Mondriaan standing next to it. Unlikely that he's still working on it. Instead of responding, the gallery owner simply turned away. [1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Cavalini_Mondriaan_1901.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Cavalini... [2] https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2022/03/02/nieuwe-werken-mondriaan-opgedoken/ https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2022/03/02/nieuwe-werken-mondri...

deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
sltkr 9mo ago
I don't have an opinion on whether the attribution is correct, but I don't think the complexity of the composition is a strong argument against it considering the artist was copying the engraving by Schongauer exactly (maybe even painting on top of it?) which takes a lot of the complexity out of it.
abdulhaq 9mo ago
You might be right but the gallery owner has probably learnt that disputing the authenticity of his pieces with walk in punters rarely leads to a fruitful discussion
prox 9mo ago
Just to engage with your “12 year old to produce by yourself” , here are some examples of art made by Picasso in his early teens to mid teens. It’s absolutely possible to be that good. Especially in the middle ages / early renaissance with the work you did for guilds and working for masters as an apprentice. At eleven years old: https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-3939.php https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-3939.php At fourteen at his sisters wedding: https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-9.php https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-9.php At fifteen https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-11.php https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-11.php
- nextaccountic 9mo ago
  > It’s absolutely possible to be that good. Sure, but not if this is your first painting. Humans can't one-shot art like this
  - Nition 9mo ago
    The title is sensationalised. They mean the earliest painting of his that we have. It's also a copy of an existing engraving.
    - nextaccountic 9mo ago
      Then that's very believable (well, depending on what age he started). As a comparison, Mozart's compositions when he was 15 years old was unbelievable, unless you put in context he was already composing music at 5 years old
- vilhelm_s 9mo ago
  But he had not been an apprentice before making this, he started the apprenticeship that year, and this is supposed to be the first thing he ever painted. > Michelangelo's biographers—Giorgio Vasari (1511–1574) and Ascanio Condivi (1525–1574)—tell us that, aside from some drawings, his first work was a painted copy after a well-known engraving by Martin Schongauer (1448–1491) showing Saint Anthony tormented by demons. Made about 1487–88 under the guidance of his friend and fellow pupil Francesco Granacci, Michelangelo's painting was much admired; it was even said to have incited Ghirlandaio's envy. [https://www.metmuseum.org/exhibitions/listings/2009/michelangelo https://www.metmuseum.org/exhibitions/listings/2009/michelan...]
  - prox 9mo ago
    I can’t respond much too this being Michelangelo’ painting, but if he was an apprentice under his fellow pupil it’s possible that he just did minor things or filled in. It was how you learned. You did final retouching and such.
- 9mo ago
pizzathyme 9mo ago
It seems unbelievable that this is the first time the child ever picked up a paintbrush and applied paint to a surface. It's probably more like: this is the first "published" final painting he ever did, after doing hundreds of other practice paintings/sketches that don't "count"
Thorrez 9mo ago
Is there a consensus among art historians about whether it's a work by Mondriaan or not? Christies seems to say it is: https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-6435483 https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-6435483

by smokel 9mo ago

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

sltkr 9mo ago

I don't have an opinion on whether the attribution is correct, but I don't think the complexity of the composition is a strong argument against it considering the artist was copying the engraving by Schongauer exactly (maybe even painting on top of it?) which takes a lot of the complexity out of it.

abdulhaq 9mo ago

You might be right but the gallery owner has probably learnt that disputing the authenticity of his pieces with walk in punters rarely leads to a fruitful discussion

prox 9mo ago

Just to engage with your “12 year old to produce by yourself” , here are some examples of art made by Picasso in his early teens to mid teens. It’s absolutely possible to be that good. Especially in the middle ages / early renaissance with the work you did for guilds and working for masters as an apprentice. At eleven years old: https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-3939.php https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-3939.php At fourteen at his sisters wedding: https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-9.php https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-9.php At fifteen https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-11.php https://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-11.php

nextaccountic 9mo ago
> It’s absolutely possible to be that good. Sure, but not if this is your first painting. Humans can't one-shot art like this
- Nition 9mo ago
  The title is sensationalised. They mean the earliest painting of his that we have. It's also a copy of an existing engraving.
  - nextaccountic 9mo ago
    Then that's very believable (well, depending on what age he started). As a comparison, Mozart's compositions when he was 15 years old was unbelievable, unless you put in context he was already composing music at 5 years old
vilhelm_s 9mo ago
But he had not been an apprentice before making this, he started the apprenticeship that year, and this is supposed to be the first thing he ever painted. > Michelangelo's biographers—Giorgio Vasari (1511–1574) and Ascanio Condivi (1525–1574)—tell us that, aside from some drawings, his first work was a painted copy after a well-known engraving by Martin Schongauer (1448–1491) showing Saint Anthony tormented by demons. Made about 1487–88 under the guidance of his friend and fellow pupil Francesco Granacci, Michelangelo's painting was much admired; it was even said to have incited Ghirlandaio's envy. [https://www.metmuseum.org/exhibitions/listings/2009/michelangelo https://www.metmuseum.org/exhibitions/listings/2009/michelan...]
- prox 9mo ago
  I can’t respond much too this being Michelangelo’ painting, but if he was an apprentice under his fellow pupil it’s possible that he just did minor things or filled in. It was how you learned. You did final retouching and such.
9mo ago

pizzathyme 9mo ago

It seems unbelievable that this is the first time the child ever picked up a paintbrush and applied paint to a surface. It's probably more like: this is the first "published" final painting he ever did, after doing hundreds of other practice paintings/sketches that don't "count"

Thorrez 9mo ago

Is there a consensus among art historians about whether it's a work by Mondriaan or not? Christies seems to say it is: https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-6435483 https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-6435483