File talk:Mona Lisa, by Leonardo da Vinci, from C2RMF retouched.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Reverting of colour editing[edit]

User:Cybershot800i edited this image to alter the colours. However, the resulting colours are no longer accurate and true to the current appearance of the painting, which is what this image is intended to depict. I did alter levels to make the image brighter and easier to see, but I did not alter the original colours from C2RMF. From en:Talk:Mona Lisa, I have extensive evidence backing up that C2RMF's scan is true to the colours of the original:

The photographer here is an academic institution with an interest in and history of correct colour reproduction. [...] It was produced using advanced equipment with the intention of being color-accurate. You can compare its colors directly to images in the following articles, which describe advanced color-accurate scanning machines produced by the National Research Council of Canada and others and their use on the Mona Lisa:
  • François Blais, John Taylor, Luc Cournoyer, Michel Picard, Louis Borgeat, Guy Godin, J.-Angelo Beraldin, Marc Rioux, Christian Lahanier, Bruno Mottin. More than a poplar plank: the shape and subtle colors of the masterpiece Mona Lisa by Leonardo. [1] "The primary advantage of using a high-resolution optical 3D laser scanner for the recording of works of art such as the Mona Lisa is that it yields a very accurate archival quality “3D Digital Model” of the exact shape as well as the color reflectance of the object." Compare Figures 1, 4, 5, which feature digital renderings of the captured data.
  • P.Cotte, D.Dupraz. Spectral imaging of Leonardo Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa: A true color smile without the influence of aged varnish. "The capabilities of the multispectral system [...] have made it possible to achieve [...] a level of accuracy regarding color information which cannot be achieved with traditional technologies." Compare Figure 2.
I also have at least one textual source to confirm the proper color of the sky:
  • Borgeat, L.; Godin, G.; Massicotte, P.; Poirier, G.; Blais, F.; Beraldin, J.-A. Visualizing and Analyzing the Mona Lisa . [2] "We can also see in that image a few blue specks, highlighted in Figure 7b. Those are believed to be pigments that were protected from aging by another frame, and could indicate the sky’s original color, which turned from blue to green as the varnish yellowed and the painting became much darker."

Please do not alter the colours of this image. If you want to create a version with colours closer to that of the work as it was originally painted, please upload it under a different filename (however, also see the existing File:Mona Lisa-LF-restoration-v2.jpg). Dcoetzee (talk) 17:38, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Fine, I can indeed see that you don't like it. However, first have you ever seen the original contrast and true colors from the original Mona Lisa? Just a simple comparison on which you can see the original colors: Pic example A Pic example B Pic example C My statement: If these simple amateur photos can capture an example of the original lightening contrast and give us a very good image of the original colors, How can you say that my "retouched" version of the first version is "no longer accurate and true", but keep saying that this current "retouched" version is 100% correct? Besides only because it was shot by an "academic institution", doesn't mean that the output image (File:Mona Lisa, by Leonardo da Vinci, from C2RMF.jpg) which was made with an special camera, is automatically a perfect reproduction! You can obviously see that this image file is unedited raw material. However, the you as the person who retouched the current file didn't really use much time by editing the picture. That is why it keeps looking like one of those 30 years old book reproductions. The first uploaded original file is just pretty dark in brightness and a little too high in contrast. But still, even on this picture I can see the blue color but also the green color on it. The current upload of the "retouched" picture is only increased in contrast and brightness, which caused the bright yellowish color in the upper part and the redish color in the dark area. The result is that neither the color contrast nor the brightness contrast was put back in the proper condition. Thats why I see that this retouched picture which one we are talking about (not the original file) is based on obviously nothing or on a yellowish old reproduction in a book, but mine based on natural color an natural contrast of the original picture, which you can see in the examples above. Besides you can find dozens more of these amateur photos in the NET and they all look a way more natural then the current yellowish/redish one. Do you really think now that the current upload soooo much better then the one I retouched? Well, whatever you keep thinking about, is no longer my concern. It would be good if there is probably also some support for my retouched version now. Or is it sooo bad at all? However, Best regards --Cybershot800i (talk) 18:20, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Губы[edit]

Обращаю внимание на то что нижняя губа для зрителя смещена вправо относительно верхней.АСмуров (talk) 21:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Full spectar color[edit]

Beuutiful wife Vinsent Constantine (talk) 14:30, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Author link leads to dead page[edit]

{{Edit request}}Author link leads to dead page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megid0nt (talk • contribs) 01:38, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Megid0nt: Hi, and welcome. I made this edit for you. See also COM:SIGN.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:10, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:Mona_Lisa,_by_Leonardo_da_Vinci,_from_C2RMF_retouched.jpg&oldid=641474196"