Here's an unbeatable combination: "500 Years of Female Portraits in Western Art" accompanied by Yo-Yo Ma playing the sarabande from Bach's first cello suite in G Major. Simply breathtaking. (The creator is eggman913: click on the link for his other works.)
Watch it once for the pure enjoyment. (After my first viewing, I felt like I had had a glimpse of the archetypal woman.) Watch it again to study it more closely, and select your favorites.
I counted approximately 85 women, with each morphing into the next about every two seconds or so. In this case, the morphing effect gives the portraits a 3-D feel (to me, at least). Also, because each woman is morphing into another woman, I felt that many of the "in-between" faces were also quite intriguing. Notice that the basic proportions of the mouth-eyes-nose vary so little from one portrait to the next. I cared less for the portraits selected to represent the 20th century, and liked those from the 18th and 19th centuries best. My favorites were 2:22, 2:00,1:32,1:20,1:03, and :52 (time remaining).
Any thoughts?
It occurred to me during the video, that these are all "Western" style portraits, then I went back and saw that was part of the title! It would be interesting to compare this with a compilation of portraits from around the globe.
Did you catch the PBS series with John Cleese about the human face? He interviewed an expert who had developed a set of geometric relationships that described our sense of beauty. That gets close to the proportions you are talking about and the idea of an achetype, I think.
And I also noticed the 3-d feeling as the images shifted. Very neat!
Posted by: Becky McCray | 05 June 2007 at 11:19 AM
Roger,
Than you for pointing out this fantastic video. For me the interesting thing was that at first I wanted to know "How long is this going to take?" You find interesting things but I am pretty busy. Once I started watching I thought, "I wish it would pause just a little longer at each face." If the video had been listed as longer than 3 minutes I would not have watched it. I would have thought that I will try to watch it later, but I would have forgotten.
So, my favorite woman is still my wife, but for today, because she must have taught you so well, your mother is a close second. As for those gals in the paintings, well I don't know. They went by too fast.
Posted by: Roger Anderson | 05 June 2007 at 12:31 PM
Becky: Thanks for stopping by. I saw a version of this same video in which someone had substituting the Bach with some rap music. It had a very different feel.
Roger: You're a lucky man!
Posted by: Roger von Oech | 05 June 2007 at 10:28 PM
Roger,
Beautiful indeed. Thank you.
Great music too.
John
Posted by: Shakespeare's Fool | 08 June 2007 at 08:18 PM
What an interesting video! It was interesting to watch how all of the features of the women, seemed to share the same features for awhile. (example eyes, nose shape)
Posted by: Leigh | 09 June 2007 at 01:14 AM
I've only watched it once, but the thing that captured my attention through the whole thing was the eyes. I could not stop looking at the eyes.
Thanks for sharing this link, Roger.
Posted by: Roy Jacobsen | 11 June 2007 at 05:43 AM
I'd say it creates an image of the archetypal white woman....
Because of that I find it lacking but still beautiful.
Posted by: leiselb | 13 June 2007 at 02:50 PM
Leislb: Thanks for your comment. I should point out that the video's creator titled the work: "500 Years of Female Portraits in Western Art." So the pool he's drawing from are essentially European women.
Now imagine if he had done a video titled "500 Years of Female Portraits in Japanese Art." And suppose someone said, "It creates an image of the archetypal Japanese women. Because of that I find it lacking but still beautiful." What would you say or think?
Posted by: Roger von Oech | 13 June 2007 at 06:03 PM
Roger: You are definitely right. The music was beautiful, and the faces in between were just as fascinating as the originals.
I thought to myself that you can see a hugely different choice of models in the 20th century. My fave period is Art Nouveau, but in general I agree that the 20th century was not well-represented. There was also more fluidity in the transitions between earlier century paintings.
Posted by: raj | 15 July 2007 at 08:42 PM
Fabulous video. I watched the eyes, too.
I was watching for my personal favorite but didn't see it -- Caravaggio's St. Catherine of Alexandria:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Catherine_(Caravaggio)
Thanks --
Posted by: Stephen Denny | 16 July 2007 at 07:02 PM