No title available
Cosimo Galluzzi
TMBGareOK. The Official They Might Be Giants tumblr

#extradirty

Discoholic šŖ©
Cosmic Funnies
occasionally subtle
YOU ARE THE REASON

Origami Around
EXPECTATIONS

No title available
Misplaced Lens Cap
Fai_Ryy
noise dept.
Xuebing Du
ā
Today's Document
macklin celebrini has autism
cherry valley forever

⣠Chile in a Photography ā£
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Pakistan

seen from United States
seen from Bangladesh

seen from Syria

seen from Italy
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from Mali

seen from Malaysia

seen from Chile

seen from Congo - Brazzaville
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Colombia
@nanithwfuck
Fire-breathing dragon catches fire at Disney World parade (Vid: IG - hollyer)
Fucking magical
Reblog if itās ok for people to give you $599.99
Please donāt hesitate
1 penny below reporting limit for the IRS⦠I see what you did there
(Donāt give me $599.99)
Thatās not the right IRS rule.
$599.99 is the amount below which a business does not need to issue a 1099 to a contractor who provides business services. The contractor still needs to report the income on their taxes.
The correct number for the IRS rule for money that is giftedĀ rather than received in a business transaction is $13999.99āmore than that, and the recipient has to pay tax on the gift and report it to the IRS. Less than that, and thereās no taxation or reporting requirement.
If weāre choosing amounts on the basis of IRS limits,Ā give these people $13,999.99.Ā
Go. Do it.
Reblog if itās ok for people to give you $13,999.99
Can u believe there are plants that are illegal Plants
Can you believe there is love that is illegal Love
can you believe itās not butter butter
the fact that Tumblr can fit weed, bestiality and diary products all into one post doesnāt even phase me anymore
i really dont think they meant bestiality
upkyle
Wait⦠whatās āupkyleā?
Too much internet today
Careful not to drop those dildos, Butterfingers.
BUT WHY DID YOU CROP THE WORST PART?
finally
me at age 11 learning the word āfuckā:
i donāt really think the relationship between generation z and millennials is comparable to the relationship between baby boomers and millennials
mostly because largely speaking. baby boomers are the parents of millennials but millennials arenāt the parents of generation z
your older sibling telling you youāre an idiot for eating laundry detergent just isnāt the same thing as your parents berating you for not having a job in a shitty economy
The other day my mom said something that i found really insulting to the 2d animation movies, she said that they stopped doing those because they were no longer appealing to the audience and that they were supposed to be discontinued, and i just thought how bullshit of an argument that is.
Comparing 2d animation with 3d and saying one is superior is like saying that digital art is better than traditional art, better than the fucking Mona Lisa, The creation of Adam, in fact, is a pretty ignorant comparation to do because one does not suprass the other, but new techniques are getting invented and we invest in those more.
Is just another way of animation, in fact, the shitty move all those studios did by closing their 2d animation studios eas pointless and it“s gonna cost them greatly, because someday people are gonna want to go back to the 2d animation and studios like Disney or Dreamworks will be too scared to do that, that will be the day that other studios will take upon them and give us what we want.
2D animation has the most beautiful animation i“ve ever seen, there“s something in it that i can“t explain that makes a big difference from watching cgi, and what i think would make a great combination is the great amount of details that you see in CGI and 3D movies into 2D techniques so you could expect to see shit like this
Atlantis (2001)
Treasure Planet (2002)
Sinbad (2003)
5 centimeters per second (2007)
The princess and the frog (2009)
Children who lost their Voices (2011)
Beyond the boundary (2015)
Your name (2016)
So whoever dares to say 2d animation is dead is wrong and also a bitch
post enhancedĀ
āI hate catsā Yo dude i trusted you wtf the fuck? What the fuck?? What the fuck what the
pa la cultura
reblog if you think sign language should be taught as a language in schools.
A remarkable Jacobean re-emergence after 200 years of yellowing varnish Courtesy Philip Mould
PAINT RESTORATION OF MESMERIZING
I saw this on Twitter. Heās using acetone, but a cellulose ether has been added to make it into a gel (probably Klucelāthis entire gel mixture is sometimes just called Klucel by restorers, but Klucel is specifically the stuff that makes the gel).Ā
Normally, acetone is too volatile for restoration, but when itās a gel, it becomes very stable and a) stays on top of the porous surface of the painting, and b) wonāt evaporate. So it can eat up the varnish.
It looks scary, but acetone has no effect on oils, and jelly acetone is even less interactive with the surface of the paint or canvas.
Will someone PLEASE clean the mona lisa
For those who are wondering, they cleaned a copy of the Mona Lisa made by one of Da Vinchiās students, and hereās a side by side comparison:
CLEAN THE FUCKING MONA LISA.
A couple problems with cleaning the Mona Lisa:
The Mona Lisa is a glazed painting.
A Direct Painting is one in which the artist mixes a large amount of paint of the correct value and shade the first time, and applies it to the painting. A Glazed Painting is a painting in which an underpainting is painted, generally in shades of gray or brown, and a allowed to dry, before layers of very thin glaze -Ā a mixture of a tiny bit of pigment and a lot of oil - is applied to the surface.Ā Some artists, such as Leonardo, choose to work this way because it provides an incredible sense of light and illumination (look at how the real Mona Lisa seems to glow).
The Mona Lisa is an incredible work of glazed painting, but that makes it fragile, so fragile that many conservators donāt want to work on it because itās extremely difficult and a conservation effort go wrong for many many reasons. One of the reasons it could go wrong is that the glazes and the varnish layers are actually a very similar chemical composition, and a conservator could accidentally strip off layers of glaze while removing the varnish.Ā
In fact, in 1809 during its first restoration when they stripped off the varnish, they also stripped off some of the top paint layers, which has caused the painting to look more washed out than Leonardo painted it.Ā
The Mona Lisa also has a frankly ridiculous amount of glaze layers on it, as Leonardo considered it incomplete up until he died, He actually took it with him when he left Italy (fleeing charges of homosexuality), meaning it never even got to the family who had commissioned it, and instead constantly altered it, trying to get it just a touch more perfect every time. That makes it really fragile, with countless layers of very thin paint, many of which have cracked, warped, flaked, or discolored. Itās not just the top layer, its layers and layers of glazing throughout the painting that have slowly discolored or been damaged over time.
Speaking of damage, look at the cracking. Thatās called craquelure; it happens with many paintingās (even ones that arenāt painted with this technique) because the paint shrinks as it dries, or the surface itās painted on warps. Ā Notice that the other painting has very little of it, even though itās almost the same age.
The reason the Mona Lisa has so much craquelureĀ is because Leonardo was highly experimental, almost to the point of it being his biggest flaw. There were established painting techniques, and then there were Leonardoās painting techniques. Ā The established painting techniques were created in order to insure longevity and quality, but Leonardo didnāt stick to any of them. This has made his work a ticking time bomb of deterioration.Ā
Donāt believe me, check it out:
This is how most people think The Last Supper looks
But this is actually a copy done by Andrea Solari in 1520.
The actual Last Supper looks like this:
The Last Supper has been painstakingly and teadiously restored, with conservators sometimes working on sections as small as 4 cm a day. To get to it youāve got to walk through a series of airlocks (AIRLOCKS!?!?!) and they only allow 15 people at a time because the moisture from your breath and your skin particles will damage it. Despite all of the precautions and restoration, it still looks like that.
This is because Leonardo painted the last supper using highly experimental methods. He didnāt use the traditional wet-into-wet method that fresco painters used, and insead painted onto the dry plaster on the wall, meaning the paint did not chemically adhere.Ā Before he even died the painting had already begun to flake. Itās a miracle itās still there at all.
Theyāve done what restoration they can on The Last SupperĀ because the painting will absolutely disappear if they donāt. The Mona Lisa, which is delicate, but much more stable, doesnāt need the same kind of attention. And, like many of his works, is just too delicate to touch, and the risk of doing irreparable damage to it is far too high.Ā The Mona Lisa is insured for something like 800 million dollars, and thatās a lot of money to be ruined by one wrong brush stroke. (fun fact: the most expensive painting ever sold was also a Leonardo, the Salvator Mundi, and it went for 450 million dollars.)
Furthermore, there are probably only 20 or so authenticated Leonardo paintings in the whole world. If you look through the list, most of them arenāt even fully done by him, are disputed, or arenāt even finished.Ā Ā Itās simply too difficult and too risky to restore the Mona Lisa, one of Leonardoās only finished and mostly intact works, when thereās hardly any more of his paintings to fall back on.
Now the painting you see in the video above is 200 years old, not 600 years old, and I assure you, the conservators decided the risk to restore it was minimal (after extensive research, paint testing, x-raying, gamma radiation, etc.) and that the work they were doing was worth the risk based on the paintingās value.
Conservators make the decision all the time about how much they can do for a painting, because really, they have the ability to completely strip a painting of all varnish and glazes and just repaint the whole thing (which happens to a lot of badly damaged paintings, especially when thereās no way to save them - one of the very small museums in my area recently deaccessioned a Monet because it was barely original, and no one wants to look at a Monet thatās only 20% Monetās work) - but doing that to the Mona Lisa, removing the artistās hand from the most famous piece of artwork in history? Hell No.
(also, Iām not a conservator but Iāll be applying to a conservation grad program sometime next year, so sorry if any of my info is at all inaccurate)Ā
I found this really interesting, thanks for sharing.