New Research Topic - The Airships of King Solomon

[Sinny]

THAT is why I "mix things up"

The Shield in the coin example is hard to say it is NOT a UFO  "...a flying object came from the heavens sent by the God Jupiter to save the day" 

Now we look at a Religious Patron commissioning an artwork...

Patron says:  "Paint me a picture of an Angel in a glowing "Glory" sent from God to make an announcement to the shepherds and have the shepherds and their dogs gazing up into the heavens shielding their eyes from the brightness of the "Glory"

UFO researcher says: Paint me a picture of some Tall Whites with a glowing aura standing in front of a bright glowing UFO"

Funny... I don't see the difference

Win.

[zorgon]

Did he really? That drawing (looks more like an engraving) was made by Édouard Riou, and I thought Jules Verne was only a writer.

AH!!! So your saying Édouard Riou made that engraving from Jules Verne's DESCRIPTION?

[ArMaP]

THAT is why I "mix things up"

I don't understand why, it only "muddies the waters".

Funny... I don't see the difference

I see two differences:
1 - the religious work follows the "standards" for religious works (otherwise the artist would risk not getting paid or, depending on the cases, be put on a slow fire) while the UFO art follows the UFO art "standards";
2 - both works are affected by way of thinking of the time they were made.

[ArMaP]

AH!!! So your saying Édouard Riou made that engraving from Jules Verne's DESCRIPTION?

I'm not saying it, as I never state things I don't know as absolute truths (like you did when you wrote that Jules Verne had made the drawing  ), but that's how things are usually done, the writer, as the person who had the idea, tells the drawer what he/she has in mind and the drawer/painter/whatever makes the work and shows it to the writer, to see if it follows the original idea.

[The Seeker]

1 - the religious work follows the "standards" for religious works (otherwise the artist would risk not getting paid or, depending on the cases, be put on a slow fire) while the UFO art follows the UFO art "standards";

Armap, then it seems to me that adding flying craft to religious paintings in that era was an acceptable practice...

2 - both works are affected by way of thinking of the time they were made.

I tend to agree; but this just re-inforces that whoever was giving guidance to what was to be put on the canvas had reason for wanting aerial objects depicted...



seeker

[A51Watcher]

Nice collection of religious UFO art there Z! 

I noticed when you posted this one in an earlier thread -




...our resident art critic thought that the artist was just a crap painter of clouds.

Odd that this artist does an admirable job of portraying people, buildings, structures, background scenery, and distance perspective with no problem, but suddenly when it came time to paint clouds, suddenly all his skill went out the window.

How very strange, all the way to quite unlikely I would wager. 

Anyway, here's a few more crap religious paintings of clouds, sending out beams of light and what not to round out your collection -








 

[ArMaP]

Armap, then it seems to me that adding flying craft to religious paintings in that era was an acceptable practice...
I tend to agree; but this just re-inforces that whoever was giving guidance to what was to be put on the canvas had reason for wanting aerial objects depicted...

But that's what I have been saying, the paintings represent what was asked, not what really happened in biblical times.

They are not a pictorial report of events, so we cannot really say that this painting or that are evidence that what it looks like really happened 2000 years ago.

[ArMaP]

...our resident art critic thought that the artist was just a crap painter of clouds.

What I (not an art critic, although any artist will tell you that anyone is an art critic ) was that "the painter was not very good or too lazy". In the much better quality version you posted the clouds have more detail, so they look more like clouds, although not as much as I think they should.
The same happens with the mountains in the background, they look slightly "stylized".

Odd that this artist does an admirable job of portraying people, buildings, structures, background scenery, and distance perspective with no problem, but suddenly when it came time to paint clouds, suddenly all his skill went out the window.

How very strange, all the way to quite unlikely I would wager. 

One common thing was for the painter to do the main parts of the work and have his students (painters working for him, trying to become professional painters) to do the backgrounds and other less important parts. If they were good enough they could, for example, do the clothes, while the master did the most important parts, like the faces or the main figures.

I don't know if that's what happened with this artist (not all had students) and this particular painting.

[Sinny]

Well the options are, ArMap... Work with what we've got or not at all.

I'll be the first to say 'we can never know for sure', but we can still make educated guesses.

[ArMaP]

Well the options are, ArMap... Work with what we've got or not at all.

That's obvious, but when we work with something we should look at it (whatever it is) as it is, not as what we like it to be.

I'll be the first to say 'we can never know for sure', but we can still make educated guesses.

That's my problem, when we are talking about art, ignoring all that's behind it is making uneducated guesses. Art is a specific area, with specific "standards" and "rules", so, if we include the standards and rules of other areas, why should we ignore them when we are talking about art, specially religious art?

[zorgon]

So you are saying that detailed descriptive narrations given and written down by many people made in the CONTEXT of the time the events happened... cannot be accurately portrayed by an artist?

[ArMaP]

So you are saying that detailed descriptive narrations given and written down by many people made in the CONTEXT of the time the events happened... cannot be accurately portrayed by an artist?

No, I'm saying nothing like that, having to keep on repeating what I am saying because of all those misleading answers that imply that I said things I didn't say is getting tiring.

I'm saying that the paintings are influenced by the time they were made and by the interpretation of the painter and of the person (if any) that was paying for the painting.

[Sinny]

And? Are you assuming the artists/directors interpretation is wrong?

[burntheships]

Hi all, I am enjoying the thread so far.

A disc like object pouring smoke; hovering over buildings has been found in a Romanian monastery wall painting thought to date from the 16th century.



It is very close to the depiction in the coin Z has posted.

[zorgon]

And? Are you assuming the artists/directors interpretation is wrong?

What she said


Don't forget these were included in paintings at a time when the Inquisition was looking over your shoulder