Mona Lisa's biggest secret revealed: a painting hidden in a painting

Mona Lisa: Under the Veil

Today we lift the veil.
No one has ever seen this before.
Today you discover the concealed painting that's been hidden in plain sight for over 5 centuries by the genius that was Leonardo Da Vinci.
We believe people of the world should not live out their entire lives having never gleaned at the true beauty that the artists forge.
This is a small morsel of a universe of things that human eye annd mind are yet to discover that you will need to discover for yourself.
But this should leave you in awe and amazement today.


A picture within a picture. Who is the true subject of the Da Vinci's attention. Is that us, you and I, receiving a message from the genius through the 5 centuries. Or is it every woman who is holding a secret. Or a man who see more than meets the eye in a woman. Or is it the urgent information that must be delivered.

Original Mona Lisa painting:

Da_Vinci's_Mona_Lisa_with_original_colors_approximation.jpg



The area of interest on the Mona Lisa painting:

Da_Vinci's_Mona_Lisa_with_original_colors_approximation (3).jpg



The area of interest isolated and magnified:

Da_Vinci's_Mona_Lisa_with_original_colors_approximation (1).jpg



The structural elements that identify an eye and hair strands:

Da_Vinci's_Mona_Lisa_with_original_colors_approximation (2).jpg



The veil is lifted, do you now see the woman Da Vinci really wanted to paint?

Da_Vinci's_Mona_Lisa_with_original_colors_approximation (4).jpg



This is not a figment of your imagination, this is what Da Vinci intended. There's so much more I wish you all could know, but this is important for everyone to enjoy.

This is very relevant to computers and technology in general. There's so much beautiful work and time and people and veiled smiles behind everything we come to enjoy. Many thanks to the wonderful FreeBSD community for revealing a hidden beauty of the ingenious operating system we call FreeBSD.
 
Given the fact that Leonardo was not particulary interested in women, I'll take that with some grains of salt.
 
Canvas is expensive. Maybe he just painted over previous attempts?

As far as homosexuality of Leonardo is concerned I am very skeptical. There is a strong bias in post-modern academia to paint every odd/nerdy and/or unmarried guy as homosexual.
 
Well, you should go see it for yourself with your own eyes. It's deliberate strokes, not some stuff bleeding through.

You are right about being skeptical for those reasons. It's probably an echo of a larger misandry movement.
 
There surely is an xray of the picture. In that, you would see any paint-over actions, which is an indicator of being authentic. If you see a newly discovered Rembrand and it has been painted in one sitting, no corrections, you should keep your wallet closed. But sometimes the greed takes over. One forger even wrote "Forged" with lead paint on the canvas and painted over that, a museum bought it nevertheless. When they tried to sue him for forgery to save their own faces, which did not turn out like they wanted.
 
Might want to look up what fiction means.
Unfortunately, majority of population takes most of their info, knowledge and world view from the blinking box.
On the other hand, world runs on conspiracies- from Santa to trade secrets. And the last properly (relatively speaking) explained conspiracy was the one of Caesar murder.
From then on it is all very vague and obfuscated.

Secret Jesus' ancestry is all very cool and all but just for fun I would like to see similar story about other certain prophets. Author would probably need bigger budget for bodyguards.
At least it excludes the possibility to portray him as homosexual, having hanky panky with Mary Magdalene. Don't want to give them ideas, tho.
 
Might want to look up what fiction means.
Yes, it's fiction but it's based on the book that makes false claims about things no one believes. So fiction based on supposed true statements known or thought to be fiction themselves.
It's one thing to tell me a story about a witch but another to tell me a witch story and claim the church believed in it.

I remember the howls of people against the book and, therefore, the movie. I remember watching part of it but disliking it overall and not just the story.
 
The hair strands are... her hair protruding from under the scarf. They are indeed deliberate as they are a part of the art.

The "area of interest" looks more like three fingers and a thumb to me - a partially visible closed hand. But that's only an optical illusion. Much like if you gathered some textile in a heap and stared long enough you might see a face or other shapes. Someone else will see something different.

Da Vinci Code is something I have never watched/read. I do recall a lot of people bought into it as "some semblance of the truth"at the time however. This happlens a lot. With certain "historical" (based) films, many people often subconsciously use that as their "reference material". The film may be biased, partially fiction, present a version of events only from a single perspective, but there are those who will soak it up.
 
Rotten Tomatoes professional reviewers gives it a 25/100 while regular people give it a 57. All of that is pretty bad.
Roger Ebert gave it three out of four stars and said "The movie works; it’s involving, intriguing and constantly seems on the edge of startling revelations." but earlier writes:
Dan Brown‘s novel is utterly preposterous; Ron Howard‘s movie is preposterously entertaining. Both contain accusations against the Catholic Church and its order of Opus Dei that would be scandalous if anyone of sound mind could possibly entertain them. I know there are people who believe Brown’s fantasies about the Holy Grail, the descendants of Jesus, the Knights Templar, Opus Dei and the true story of Mary Magdalene. This has the advantage of distracting them from the theory that the Pentagon was not hit by an airplane.
A movie or book that's entertaining I'll enjoy as much as anyone but a movie or book that makes false accusations I have a problem with.
 
Back
Top