The painting sold for 450 million and they have a 10 cent sound system. Time to upgrade!

@jacobjorgenson9285

3 жыл бұрын

Why? This is an internal presentation

@jsnedd66

2 жыл бұрын

yes and that about the lighting ,its glare-tastic

Whoever bought it soon, I hope he lend it to a museum so everyone from all walks of life can enjoy the painting.

@WokeSavage

6 жыл бұрын

just sold for 450 million at auction!

@tsurumikutaro7642

6 жыл бұрын

I think the new owner is Le Louvre Abu Dhabi.

@gavinreid8351

5 жыл бұрын

Still not on public display, apparently due to the controversy .is it really by Leonardo?

@watermelonlalala

5 жыл бұрын

@@gavinreid8351 It broke into little pieces after they bought it.

Strange how the mona lisa has hundreds of tiny partial fingerprints where da vinci used his fingertips like a pallet knife. They used it to verify his other works. An expert in the 80s even said “it’s better than a signature” And yet they couldn’t find any prints in this piece but today’s expert declares this to be a da vinci.

@juniorjohnson5961

3 жыл бұрын

Biggest Art scam ever 😱 Christie's is in on the scam and made a ton of money !

@lukesm5747

Ай бұрын

They are all in on the scam.The restorer these three clowns and the two guys who bought it for peanuts and finally Christies. There's a sucker born every minute!

Thank you so much for this wonderful video !!!!!

This is an outstanding picture and i dont mind if it is a real DaVinci or not. I think this picture deserve to be presented in a museum and i believe the professional authorities in the museum will definitely take care of the picture better than the buyer .

Mentioning Warhol and da Vinci in the same sentence is outrageous.

@PHlophe

6 жыл бұрын

Zvoni, both can co-exist in the larger art world just fine.

@zvonimirtosic6171

6 жыл бұрын

Warhol and many moderns are not artists, but dilettantes, paid obnoxiously and flattered beyond measure, but chosen to promote a counter-culture and counter-values, a psy-op sponsored by secret services and mostly rich bankers and industrialists of the Anglo-American empire since WW2. So next to a museum, or art gallery, opened would be "Gallery of Contemporary Art", which hosted Warhol, Pollock, Bacon, Rothko, etc., which was a front for psychological operations - planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning. Rich were involved because of sheer space and logistics required for enormous size modern works, and they reaped profit from all that. That one work by Pollock may be sold by $100 million, shows the sheer irrationality of such modern art, and vicious ulterior motive behind that charade which keeps fueling it.

@zvonimirtosic6171

6 жыл бұрын

It's been written a lot about the psy-op use of modern art; www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html

@zvonimirtosic6171

6 жыл бұрын

Unlike Warhol and abstract expressionists, Leonardo was supremely talented, for starts. He had excellent access to best of art practices, materials and tutoring at the time; ambiance gave him half the glory. However, he was also notoriously lazy, egotistic, spoiled and corrupted by the Medicis, irresponsible, double-dealing, traitor to own people, and in despise of any hard work apart from his own musings and works he was doing for own pleasure and exploration. His negligence ruined all large scale projects, he would take money advances for projects and never show up, so his name became notorious. He had to go elsewhere, always moaning how cruel world is against him. He was a spoiled child of the decadence that raised him. He is pushed in the stratosphere of art world because of his rare talent in depicting subtle nuances of the human psyche, but which Raphael mastered equally well without Platonistic overindulgence, and was technically superior to Leonardo. Raphael had superior technical knowledge of art materials and proper techniques, he run one of most prodigious studios of the time, and would not dare to ruin the contract in wild experiments. But negligent and could-not-care-less Leonardo did without pardon. Raphael was raised outside Florence and did not have spoiled sponsors, so that could be the influencing factor. Similarly, many moderns were horrible technicians; they knew nothing of the medium, nor about techniques, everything was wild experimenting for own musings. 70% of the works done by moderns is already in the state of decay because of improper techniques used, and experimenting with materials that were not tested by time.

@gasperettiarts

6 жыл бұрын

I agree. It’s not snobbery to say so. Leonardo was an absolute genius (a polymath and the first real scientist, not only a master painter) while Warhol, compared to him, was absolutely a nothing. Well, this is why Warhol didn’t contribute in any way whatsoever to the world of figurative art. You look at any of Warhol’s images and you don’t feel anything. At least I don’t.

Alistair, you are a great presenter, insightful, a bit cynical, interesting and knowledgeable. Do more, love your documentaries.

It is fascinating to ponder the whole realm of how art handles or holds the Divine, To sell a painting is to try to give finite costs to the infinite which is impossible. These perhaps atheist art dealers have a marvelous time surrounding this image of the Infinite with stories and details of science and biography. But Leonardo always challenges us to see into infinity. We know that even someone who is an atheist feels they are holding infinity in their hands. Like Christmas, it is this miracle of incarnation which is impossible and yet real and Leonardo more than anyone before or since was able to hold us on that threshold between Infinity and the precious, intimate, finite beauty of this physical world. Thanks be to God for such a gift, like Beethoven or Mozart, thank you, thank you. Leonardo does not remind me of any modern person. Not at all, he belongs in the Renaissance and to eternity as well. But no one I have ever met is like him and his vision, his love of this world.

@hollygolightly8048

6 жыл бұрын

Great observation and comment. Sadly, most of the "commentators" in this discussion won't get it.

@rosomak8244

Жыл бұрын

What about: Leonardo was not creasy. He was first and foremost an excellent craftsman. Don't read too much in to his intentions where there is plain and simply talent for a particular craft to see.

Why don't they show an image of it before it was heavily retouched?

@juniorjohnson5961

3 жыл бұрын

Funny they have one black & white , this is the biggest Art scam ever !

@falkhammermuller9342

3 жыл бұрын

Beacuse there is only a black and white image available and that is kinda not showing much.

@baddd59

2 жыл бұрын

There are some images

@rosomak8244

Жыл бұрын

Because it would make it obvious how the original image is actually very much gone for ever.

They will never admit this isn't a Da Vinci now. They have to know it's not. He might have taught the person who did it, but there's no way that's all Da Vinci. The art world is so silly these days.

@baddd59

2 жыл бұрын

Lol I believe it’s his work . His spirit is in the painting .

@rosomak8244

Жыл бұрын

I have looked in to the cleaned version before the restoration. It's accessible via wiki-meia. Well, judging by the amount of actual substance gone, this definitively isn't an original painting any more. The substance of it is plain and simply gone. There is no way around that. The restoration is more of a recreation. If the master could see it, he wouldn't be able to recognise his own hand.

I just saw it at Christies in NYC. Just amazing!! Truly a masterpiece! Photos do not get the full impact of this masterful art piece.

@WokeSavage

6 жыл бұрын

I'm jealous you got to see it!

@rafaelcolon7423

6 жыл бұрын

Woke Savage it just auctioned for 450.3 million dollars!! A true masterpiece! I'm sorry for those that like modern art but it totally destroys any modern art piece!

@WokeSavage

6 жыл бұрын

Yes I watched the auction live on the website. It was amazing to witness!

@morenaczarnecki5066

6 жыл бұрын

rafael colon not sure what you are talking about...at his time coming out of the dark ages I'm sure Leonardo was considered pretty modern. Modern Art is not to be judge by contemporaries without a true love and understanding of art itself.

@rafaelcolon7423

6 жыл бұрын

Morena Czarnecki actually, your absolutely off the topic of what I actually said about this piece. You should reread my compliment to the art piece, I did not mention modern art or how modern da Vinci was etc. I expressed how great it looked in person, I suggest you actually read a persons post before replying with a diatribe of something that was not even said . happy new year!

It might be studio Leonardo but how much is is original ?

I could listen to Alistair Sooke all day on art. He's a gem himself

@jansammer1163

2 жыл бұрын

Don’t forget that it’s marketing. He’s very good at it, admittedly.

LOVE JESUS

Why the horrible sound quality? This is most interesting, but tough to listen to. ....

COME ON, YOU GUYS!!!! This isn't by Leonardo and all these "art experts" know it. Here are the reasons why it isn't an original Leonardo. 1) the walnut panel it is painted on contains a huge bole in it. Leonardo would never have used a panel with this problem. It should be noted that walnut cannot be dated by dendochronology (because of the width of its rings), so there's no way to date the panel. 2) There are no extant cartoons of this work. 3) There is zero contemporaneous documentation of the existence of this work. Only 2 Leonardo paintings have no contemporaneous references and they are very early (Portrait of a Musician (which is probably by Boltraffio) and St. Jerome, which is unfinished). No painting painted after 1496 has zero contemporaneous references. The people promoting this piece all date it to 1499 or after. They compare this picture to the Mona Lisa, but there are numerous references to Mona Lisa in the record, but NONE to this picture. Why??? 4) The grains of the lapis lazuli (used to create the ultramarine blue paint) are extremely course for an LDV painting; 5) The painting of the rock crystal is wrong for someone like LDV, who was obsessed with optics. In reality the globe actually distorts the background; and 6) hatch lines on the painting are in the wrong direction for a lefty. The provenance cooked up by the two original sellers and Christie's is a joke. It is unquestioned that someone named Holler did an etching in the 1600's of a Salvator Mundi, which was at one time in the collection of Charles I, but there is no proof that this picture is the one Holler etched or which was owned by Charles I. There are several other Salvator Mundi's floating around out these which are better candidates for the painting owned by Charles I. The stylistic elements which Martin Kemp uses to "prove" that this is by LDV (curls, complex geometric patterns in clothing, etc.) could have been mimicked by any one of his students. The same for this painting's use of sfumato. All of his students used this technique. Yes, the hand is fine, but what about the face, which the "restorer" scraped down to the wood and repainted??? Note that the restorer has never published the restoration, which is extremely unprofessional. Also, the person who cooked up the provenance never published the basis for her findings. The foregoing analysis is based on "The Last Leonardo" by the art historian Ben Lewis. BTW, he tracked down the real provenance of this painting.

@bighoss1031

Жыл бұрын

Good points.

I read some of the comments. Warhol and Da Vinci were both artists but shouldn't be compared. They are of a different calibre and art in the eyes of the beholder is very subjective at the best of times. The Mundi was purchased with oil wealth. It's like buying something for $1 when you have $1000 in the bank!

There is a big reveal of the painting...."theatre" he calls it... and... Alastair Sooke sits slap bang in front of it. Is he even aware?

Hola cordiales saludos . excelente . exposición .es una reproducción oh una pintura original .hoy en día cómo la sociedad .prefieren . copias más no las originales . Tubo un costó dé 450 millones de dólares .y la copia del chico de Rojo 10.8 millones de euros . Mientras la pintura original del chico de Rojo qué Aún existe . sé espera su adquisición por un privado oh museo qué lo preserve a futuras generaciones.colecion de latino América Jacobo Hernández desde Colombia actualmente dueño de la obra genuina . escuchó una oferta decente por ella . felicidades

It's too bad that the closed captioning is so garbled; I'm glad I'm not deaf but only using it to help with the bad audio and accents... :-(

The painting is very similar to Albrecht Durers self portrait of 1500

@treforsquire874

4 жыл бұрын

They must have known of each other.... I have a copy of the Durer.

@rosomak8244

Жыл бұрын

@@treforsquire874 In this case it's far more important that the restorer was obviously familiar with Durer.

absolutely marvelous. I

Hola cordiales saludos . excelente hablar de Arte .es la memoria del hombre .en el corto pasó por la tierra . él hecho qué la nacional Galería de Londres aya adquirido una copia del chico de Rojo la pintura original de. Aún existe .y espera su adquisición por un privado oh museo qué lo preserve a futuras generaciones .es patrimonio cultural de dos Naciones Francia E Italia cuna del Arte clásico .Si pagaron la suma de 10.8 millones de euros . cuánto ofrecen por la pintura original . qué es de una colección de latino América Jacobo Hernández desde Colombia actualmente dueño de la obra . la cuál no está en el continente Europeo . felicidades los escucho ofertar

Well that aged like milk...

Don't forget, as you watch this, that this is a sales pitch. Nothing about the controversy here. No deep discussion of the lack of provenance. No discussion of the thorny issue of originality. Fake ? This talk is a promotional device.

@gavinreid8351

5 жыл бұрын

Documentary evidence only after 1630

@jacobjorgenson9285

3 жыл бұрын

Who cares. If someone want s to pay 450mill for it, great!

@andybaldman

3 жыл бұрын

@@jacobjorgenson9285 You're right. Integrity doesn't matter when you can lie and make money!

I wonder if they ever thought it’s depicting a huge drop of water.

The irony is that the painting was bought by an Arab sheikh who presumably is a Muslim and that religion prohibits figurative art especially of religious figures like prophets -Muslims believe Jesus to be a prophet.Maybe it's just for a select audience.

There are still a lot of people who believe that is not a DeVinci. The glass ball in Christs hand does not refract light the way it should by the hand of a master. When we are talking about these sums of money...people will tell you the sky is green and the grass is blue if you know what i mean.

@baddd59

2 жыл бұрын

People are weird . I believe it’s his work . As an artist your work it holds a spirit . Also on another documentary they say the opposite that I’m the crystal ball is way to detailed and is hands down his work. The sorrow in the eyes . It’s obvious to me

@dazuk1969

2 жыл бұрын

@@baddd59 I appreciate your opinion, but glass ball aside, I will tell you what really makes me question this painting. Da Vinci painted on wood panels, as is this painting, but there is a huge knot on the panel that eventually cracked and needed extensive restoration. A master would not have chosen a panel with a knot in it as they would know it would crack. However, I do believe his hand is at work here...but only certain areas. Imho, it is a studio/student piece with certain parts done be Da Vinci and finished by said students...as was common practise.

@baddd59

2 жыл бұрын

@@dazuk1969 I loved your explanation . I looked up a few images of a person carrying a crystal ball I did see one that had the same lighting but I understand about the wood as well . I have a crystal as well and I get the same image when a take a picture in the stance .It’s easy to capture an artist style and duplicate it but On thing that’s hard to mimick is a persons Mannerisms. When artist creates Their mannerisms plAy huge role it’s like a silent signature . But again I like your views true . I’m so interested in his work . It would be nice if it is his indeed . But we can only guess. But I’m Curious do you think maybe since Christ is the true light that the crystal ball was to show that . I thought maybe he did it like that to show he was the Christ . That he was the man God ? Idk just my thoughts as an artist. I was like of course the light should have been altered Christ is holding it . It’s a message I believe. Maybe absolutely wrong though ☺️😉😂💕

@dazuk1969

2 жыл бұрын

@@baddd59 Hi Aries, I absolutely think the glass/crystal ball is there to tell us that Christ is totally transparent in his love for humankind and always let's his love shine through. Imho, there is a hidden message as well. Crystal is a very pure form of glass, if you look closely there are imperfections (air bubbles) in it. This is very unusual for crystal and I believe they are there to remind us that we are all imperfect in one way or another. Anyway, thank you for your reply and thoughtful words.

@baddd59

2 жыл бұрын

@@dazuk1969 again we’ll said . So true . That last part about the crystal having imperfections is so on point . 💕

Never ever trust on a seller 😂 Honestly and accuracy are not their invention, isn't it.

@jacobjorgenson9285

3 жыл бұрын

Whoever sold it was once a buyer

its not mona lisa took 50 years to guess her mother name amazing

Haha. It was probably painted by Wolfgang Beltrrachi. Wouldn't be the first time he's faked out Christie's. They even used his work on the cover of their brochure to promote an art sale. Christie's wouldn't know a real painting if it smacked them in the face.

38:12 Astronomers are discovering new planets, exoplanets around other stars, by the hundreds these days thanks to specialized space telescopes !

The only expert is the one who puts up his paddle at auction

Money makes people say the most ridiculous things.

@juniorjohnson5961

3 жыл бұрын

Like this is real , Christie's was in on the scam and made a ton of money !

I promised myself I wouldn't say anything derogatory, and I won't.

@PHlophe

6 жыл бұрын

Oh Walt , I know what you are thinking , its ok we all feel the same way

@sammoulsdale701

6 жыл бұрын

Walt Evans oh please say it

@Djones156

6 жыл бұрын

lol what was he thinking?

@jacobjorgenson9285

3 жыл бұрын

That's a shame because I know you are not only a fine art expert but also an accomplished selling artist your self . I'm dying to bask in your sharp insight

@waltevans4490

3 жыл бұрын

@@jacobjorgenson9285 thank you very much for your confidence in my unstated comment perhaps it has something to do with you seeing one of the seven thousand or so art works that I've done last 86 years? Actually most of the money should have gone to the genius who restored a ghost

Follow the money.

majority of likes is authority

I think Christie's was in on the scam , they made a ton of money on this sale !

@andybaldman

3 жыл бұрын

Ding ding ding.

@kepler240

3 жыл бұрын

Only 50 million

Sorry guys.. This was not painted by Leonardo...

@andybaldman

3 жыл бұрын

Prove it.

@dr.reidsheftalltruthinscie2007

3 жыл бұрын

@@andybaldman Hi Andy. Look at this and please let me know what you think: kzread.info/dash/bejne/jIaiwayIpZqTpLg.html

@andybaldman

3 жыл бұрын

@@dr.reidsheftalltruthinscie2007 Watched your video. I get your point, but I don't think that alone is sufficient as 'proof', from a purely logical standpoint. The statue of David doesn't have correct proportions either. Do we doubt that Michelangelo made it?

@andybaldman

3 жыл бұрын

@@dr.reidsheftalltruthinscie2007 Your analysis is also affected by the fact that you are reviewing the 'restored' version, which was done by Diane Modestini, and heavily repainted. Did you check to see how her modifications compare to the untouched (and damaged) original?

@dr.reidsheftalltruthinscie2007

3 жыл бұрын

@@andybaldman Hey Andy. Good point about the Statue of David and you are correct. But Michelangelo did it on purpose. The statue was originally planned to go around the periphery at the top of a building. (I don't know how tall the building was). He wanted to make the statue look in perfect proportions from the ground. So he had to apply parallax it get it to look right. He was also incapable of getting proportions grossly wrong without a "reason". These artists were truly exceptional along these lines. I'm an artist (not really because I don't do any work save for 10 in my entire life) and I wouldn't have made the mistakes I pointed out in the SM. By the way, I like your style. "Prove it". There's no better way to get to the truth.

guy on right talks so much more than others.....alas.

@teeniebeenie8774

6 жыл бұрын

amusing: the one person cannot tell left from right....most odd

@jacobjorgenson9285

3 жыл бұрын

He is a Christie employee

very saatchi gallery posh feelings

Jesus painted in a blue dress!. Blue was almost exclusively used to identity Mary.

@dr.reidsheftalltruthinscie2007

5 жыл бұрын

GR: Interesting....check this out kzread.info/dash/bejne/iKyC2bl-eqSwl84.html Do you agree?

This whole thing was a scam, supported by many, for a quick cash grab. The evidence supporting that this is actually by Leonardo is pretty unconvincing, and far from airtight. And the marketing around this sale was pretty heavy. Really makes you wonder.

Not a da Vinci anymore, a paint by numbers poorly executed restoration. My belief is that this was originally from his studio, finished off by apprentices to begin with.

Mona Lisa

The blessing hand is goofed up because you can't see all the fingernails when fingers are bent in that position. At best you can see all the other four fingernails from the side when the thumb nail is towards viewer. Apparently, even though they worked from cartoon sketches, artists in those days did try variations and rethink them on the painting, and the painted out thumb proves nothing. Stinks of a cover up to say that it does.

@jacobjorgenson9285

3 жыл бұрын

Another KZread expert teaching Leonardo how to paint. Tell me more please

@daniyalg2436

2 жыл бұрын

*'The Fraud of The Century'* to appease *The Bouvier Affair* *Modestini Multiple Makeovers* *Martin Kemp with Museum$* *The Louvre findings suppressed* The Auction House Foreclosed The Fingers Anatomy Woeful The KNOTTED Fractured Panel. LDV MEGA UNCHARACTERIST *The List Goes On..*

This Jesus looks as if he has just smoked a joint.

Art critic, the most laughable job in the world😂.

i can buy nemar from one pound shop king in one million

bit tedious, the meandering answers to the questions from these christie gents....

$450,000,000 👍sold

Hey daddy

Auction specialist my ASS !!!

The second reproduction of Mona Lisa exhibited in shanghai the Mona Lisa from Louvre and Salvator Mundi were never painted by Da Vinci. Its absurd what they are doing...if you actually hold a brush you can see the face of Mundi is wayyyyy to bright ...terrible!

@johndef5075

2 жыл бұрын

Compared to the unrestored version its awful.

I can give a dozen reasons that I believe this is not attributable to Leonardo. It's not even a good fake!

@gavinreid8351

5 жыл бұрын

Go on then.........

@edstud1

5 жыл бұрын

@@gavinreid8351 check out Jerry Saltz's thoughts about the painting, my friend.

6 trillion rupees

This guy with white t shirt talk toooo much

The pictures Ive seen of the unrestored damaged picture show a penetrating gaze with a streamlined face. The restoration eyes are fuzzy and he looks like a chipmunk. Just awful.

@oriel9347

Жыл бұрын

To paint over a possible Leonardo Da Vinci original is absolute sacrilege and shows where their priorities lay. Disgusted.

What does the figure of Christ in the 450M $ painting, " Salvatore Mundi" denote? Irrespective whether Di Vinci painted it or not. Only a true Christian can reveal it, as for the rest it is just an expensive art.

@junedewar3551

3 жыл бұрын

Neither art dealers nor 'Christian's' are truly knowledgeable about Leonardo da Vinci paintings. Leonardo was gifted and inspired by Almighty God to give true testimony of bible prophesy for our time-period. This is the end-time. Meaning the world as we know it will disappear and a new heavens and a new earth will arise by the power of our Creator Yahoveh-Nissi-Yireh a name that denotes the King and High Priest who will rule over earth with his Saints (Rev. 5:10); and the Most High God Yahoveh whose Son has taken up the Sceptre and Commanders staff that was prophesied to depart from between Judah's feet (Genesis 49:10). I doubt you will understand what I am writing. If Christianity was true to prophesy you would understand but the whole world lies in the power of the wicked one including organised religion and its theologians.

Booorzes

Ground Zero of ARTISTRY....

expensive frame

I hate that some Saudi oil price owns this painting and uses it to decorate his yacht. I thought Muslims were against depicting prophets in art? This is a masterpiece of the Western World and belongs in a museum in the West.

@rosomak8244

Жыл бұрын

The West is culturally gone. It doesn't matter any more.

@thegreatinterpreter8382

Жыл бұрын

@@rosomak8244 I'd love to disagree with you, but I cant.

I found this very elitist in the worst possible way. The sound was cheap and rubbish. Stupid amounts of money still being paid for these artworks stinks of elitism. This isn’t art. It’s business for the wealthy. Yuk.

Still stalling elons

its a very bold move to show this fake .....like davincis

Of course LDV painted Christian subjects...people wanted only Christian subjects and portraits at the time. Painting Christian subjects doesn't mean he was a Christian. He had to eat. When he sold himself to Sforza, he didn't emphasize his ability to paint, but to construct machines of war. He was probably an atheist.

Me thinks they would've declared Leonardo's used toilet paper a masterpiece.But if it comes out that this painting is not by Leonardo, they'll use it for toilet paper.

Hideous picture

It's a fake

@chickyrogue8485

6 жыл бұрын

i feel the same way and i so like alistair sooke but this feels so devinely fake and that is why the fingers cross

@kianucollis3929

6 жыл бұрын

@ Alpha...prove it's not...!! Just because there are drawings underneath the surface, doesn't mean it's genuine...maybe the forger knows how to fake something properly.....!! For $400 million I'd hire the best forger in the world.

@onelanebridge_

6 жыл бұрын

Redina Bloogs yeah im not really feeling it is a leonardo...

@anilkumarn6091

5 жыл бұрын

Wl call for FBI investigation?

Went for 450 million!!? To bad, the bible says that Jesus is a black man. Revelation 1:14-15

@misterbonzoid

6 жыл бұрын

People who grow up where Jesus apparently did are quite brown-skinned innit

Greatest Con Job / Rip Off Ever!! All opinions were from "paid" specialist. That it is why it is not in any museum because none would say it was a real "Lennie." The Louvre would NOT hang it next to "Mona" as a real "Lennie." Case closed.