an blog | AJBlog Central | Contact me | Advertise | Follow me:

So which part of this picture is Mozart?

The analysts have been getting to work on what is said to be the earliest known picture of Mozart. Click here to read their findings.

mozart hand

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Comments

  1. Whenever an official portrait of some famous living person, like a President, is unveiled, my reaction is always, “That doesn’t look like him.”

    Truly accurate portrait paintings are rare things, we just don’t realize that because most of the portrait paintings we are familiar with are of people who were never photographed.

    The authors seem to acknowledge the hopelessness of this “biometric” endeavor when their final conclusion is merely that it is not totally impossible that this is a painting of Mozart. Indeed, to get to that they have to explain away a number of problems that would be vetoes if they were dealing with actual photographs.

  2. We learn that all “Not-Mozart” portraits somehow resemble each other. This is much more interesting: http://michaelorenz.blogspot.co.at/2013/08/not-mozart-not-zoffany-so-what.html

  3. Edmund Grundner says:

    Dear Dr. Michael Lorenz, with your unconsidered “rapid fire” at this newly discovered portrait you disqualify yourself. Such behaviour is a strong contrast to your otherwise common practice to announce only statements which are well founded on serious research.

  4. One problem: there is no serious research. Thus Braun is the laughing stock of the scholarly community.

  5. Edmund Grundner says:

    Dear Dr. Michael Lorenz, was this your second unconsidered „ rapid fire“ , or is at least this unbelievable insult to Mr. Braun well founded on serious research ?
    What I miss here are your usually brilliant justifications for your statements.
    How long did you think about this newly discovered portrait before you placed it into the row of “Not Mozart” portraits ?
    And did you ever take a closer look at the work of Mr. Braun ?
    Your unique way how you show essential things and how you sometimes disprove unfounded statements of colleagues has been very inspiring so far and I must confess that such things made me to your fan.
    Why you decide in this case here to do states resp. to draw conclusions with far-reaching consequences without adequately explaining how they were reached ?

  6. I will not begin a real discussion with one of Mr. Braun’s countless sockpuppets which have all been banned on Wikipedia.

    See: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Edliner_Mozart.jpg and: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wolfgang_Amadeus_Mozart

    Quote: “Text above supports self proclaimed expert Martin Braun, links to his site are spammed throughout all wikipedias. See discussions on en:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and de:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. His claims to be a biomedic, no real publications, not proven to have any degree. He is also an expert for shipwrecks, he presents a new theory for a desaster 50 years ago, all done by two pictures loaded from the internet. He is also an expert in biometrics, he statistically proved the authenticity of a “Mozart” portrait, by, guess how, loading and comparing pictures of paintings from the internet. There is no raw data.”

an ArtsJournal blog