Oy Vey Gevalt

Newswire:   "A photograph of the painting taken before 1912 records its compromised appearance at that time.  This photograph has recently been circulated in the media, as has another photo [with Christ in a red tunic], incorrectly identified as the (recently rediscovered) work."
 
The media has been circulating photos of the de Ganay da Vinci... not the recently UnCovered "Simon" da Vinci.





































Is it the real thing?  Adjusting for brightness and contrast reveals:




































This view gave me such a shock my heart stopped.  With the scholars who agreed within a day of examination... I can say this painting is the real Leonardo.

Supporting Documents:  The Windsor Studies for Salvator Mundi by da Vinci:
























Isn't Leonardo's working method interesting?  He laid out the tunic on a flat surface to study the folds, while the sleeve details are from a model.





































The Hollar Engraving from the original Leonardo:





































This is as close as we will get to the details of the original in situ.

One last test:  Is the 1912 photo of the badly damaged, overpainted all but destroyed da Vinci the Simon authentic or the de Ganay (fake)?

The Simon da Vinci with 1912 photo overlay:





































The de Ganay "da Vinci" with 1912 photo overlay:




































Don't you find this comparison Very Curious?  If you ask me (and why not@!) the 1912 photo is of the de Ganay "da Vinci" and not the recently authenticated Simon da Vinci.  This would support my theory that the nuns wrecked the de Ganay da Vinci with overpainting and that Marquis de Ganay had it restored between 1912 and 1999. 
Also... regarding the 1912 photo the time is always ripe for faking da Vinci's.

Fie on Thee Christopher W. Taylor!

Christopher W. Taylor
The Smith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute
2318 Fillmore Street
San Francisco, CA 94115

Dear Mr. Taylor,

Now that an authentic da Vinci has been unveiled, all references to the "Salvator Mundi" are under scrutiny.  Regrettably your paper "How did Leonardo Perceive Himself?  Metric Iconography of da Vinci's Self-Portraits" contains a glaring inaccuracy.  Vasari was describing not the Salvator Mundi but the Mona Lisa in the passage he wrote beginning:  "In his head, whoever wished to see how closely art......"  Unfortunately your misattribution has been repeated hundreds of times.

Yours sincerely,

Bhikshuni Vinaya
Ugly Buddhist Woman
Oy Vey Gevalt Blog