Did the Greeks and Roman's really paint their statues?

It's actually a lot less weird than NOT painting them, if you think about it.

Yep. Greco-Romans had absolutely shit taste.

It's not just art, really everything we think we took from the Greeks and Romans is just things we projected on our made up image of them.

>mfw the THIN YOUR PAINTS meme was actually there since the dawn of time

The Romans did the same about the Greeks. The Greeks did the same about the Egyptians. American liberals do the same about Europeans.

idk senpai these pots look pretty nice

the pots were originally painted too

youtube.com/watch?v=ENXvZ9YRjbo

>Did the Greeks and Roman's really paint their statues?

Not like that

Paints back then lack in pigment content more so than modern paints. Thin paints were all they had.

Please not the pots too!

this makes me almost as sad as dinosaurs with feathers

The temples were painted too btw.

Lots of red and yellow everywhere.

Dinosaurs with feathers are adorable.

Eh the temples don't look nearly as bad painted as the statues though

I hate the Greeks now.

>tfw no feathery T-Rex best friend to go on wacky adventures with

Were the Greeks ginger?

why can't scientists just hire some random art student that has an eye for color to do this, they work for scraps.

look at this painting from Pompey. Romans and presumably Greeks could absolutely paint well, look at this kick ass shading in the face and even the folds of clothing, it's different for each and even reveals some difference in the textures. Look at the slight fading of blue on the left guy's face, the rose on his cheeks jumps out and really feels lively, and also pay attention to the colored highlights on the things they're holding and their hair, this painting is fucking awesome and impressive to me as a modern day person.

Can this just be a Greek & Roman art appreciation thread instead

Those are actually pretty great. The one on the OP looks like a fucking toy. God, why am I so triggered by this?

Why does the right look like a nigger? are we wuz right?

This. I can't believe Greeks painted their magnificent statues to look like shit.

Rome was one of the most ethnically diverse civilizations of its time. Everyone knows this, user

Get over it. Not only greeks were brown as fuck, but also their temples and statues looked like gaudy indian shit.

I-is this true? I though the black thing was the paint.

No they're not, stop ruining my childhood.

Because is a drawing by an actual artist while and are not.

Get fucked.

IDK, chill out dude. The Romans ruled

Because men were tanned as fuck from working on the fields all day.

>dark brown hair
>dar brown eyes

Barely white in northern europe.

>northern europe.

Yeah the guy in the toga holding a scroll of paper and being painted on the wall of a villa in a wealthy holiday resort town worked on the fields all day. You stupid fuck.

>Able to afford portraits
>Live in Pompeii
>Working on the fields all day

I know sometimes they used to use white paint for female skin, but I had never heard of any other kind of painting. Do you have a source or a reconstruction or something?

So basically persian

they did, but you do need to take a step back and think about what painted statues meant in context.

namely, paints and dyes were fucking expensive in the ancient world. with red dyed clothing signaling that you were well off, and violet dye meaning you had more money than Trump.

Painting their statues and public works was seen as a sign of the immense wealth of Greece/Rome, and was a spectacle to see a city/empire so rich that not only can they dye their clothing, but also their public works to boot.

The Romans were southern Italian in appearance. In fact all the great Mediterranean civilizations were composed of people that were swarthy as fuck. Sorry you had to find out this way.

Fuck every color hating nigger in this thread by the way. As has been pointed out the original statues and buildings were not nearly as gaudy but they were still bright and colorful as it should be.

Nice perspective. Too bad Veeky Forumstorians are so full of it that I never know when people are talking with knowledge or making stuff up.

...

...

...

Um. No.

I really really hope that's what they looked like

THIN YOUR PAINTS

They probably didn't, they would have feathers or spines in some locations, but not the full coverage we see on modern birds.

Not all therapod dinosaurs have been verified to have feathers either.

Anything but is heresy.

>Rodan

>tfw you will never own your own gladiatorfu
fucking humanism i wanna breed my own races of people and shit

There is literally nothing wrong with ugly painted Greek statues. So what if they don't match up with some mythical perception you have of them? Stop taking undue, underserved and excessive pride in a group of people which you have no relation to beyond some vague and distant influences they have on your world today. Study the Greeks as you would any other civilization.

Its standard practice amongst classical artists to depict men as having darker skin than women

Its not paint, its a thin clay that turns black when you bake it. Pots like that were not painted

>he doesnt idealize hellas
>he thinks they painted their statues like a granny would her arts and crafts

barbarians please gfto

It triggers me too. It's because while they're spreading the reality that statues were painting, they're at the same time making everyone think they looked like total shit baby paintings when in reality they would have looked awesome.

Nobody is doing that, we're just saying the modern reconstructed paintjobs are terrible and they should hire an actual fucking artist to do it.

It actually says reddish hair
>kοkkινωπα μαλλια

Historians are fucking retards. Why do they think a history degree gives them any practical skill like this?

You see it with limp wristed historians and weapons. Fucking embarrassing they dont go to an actual expert.

no, more like slavic

>The Romans were southern Italian in appearance.

not according to the painted statues

the guy in the portrait isn't even tanned and his skin colour is not why the user thinks he looks like a nigger. He's referring to the hair, nose and lips, even though they're all caucasian. They both look white, just italian

the hunters are macedonian and the gladiators are german

They reconstructed the statues based on exactly how they would have been painted, at least on the base coat

Here's a little extra tidbit regarding pigments.

The materials that were ground to make these pigmwnts could get extremely expensive. Purple was a trade secret and Ultramarine Blue, for example was made of crushed Lapis Lazuli.

What is lapis lazuli, you ask? IT'S A FUCKING GEMSTONE. AS IN, YOU HAD TO HEAD TO A GEMSTONE MINE, FIND A VEIN OF LAPIS LAZULI, AND MINE THE FUCK OUT OF IT TO GET YOUR PIGMENT BASE. AND THEN SHIP IT BACK WITHOUT GETTING ANALLY RAPED BY BANDITS WITH SPEARS BECAUSE GUESS WHAT, YOU'RE SHIPPING MOTHERFUCKING GEMSTONES.

thicc

Are you playing dumb or really this ignorant? The statue of David was found in present day Sudan around 50 years before Michaelangelo was commissioned to strip the paint and give him white features.

Well we know they painted walls so why not statues?

>They did, but we can only reconstruct the base coat of paint today. There's no way they appeared as crude.

The only correct answer in this thread, everyone else should quit whining. Anyone who ever painted anything other than a wall must know that you use a base coat. That's the only layer applied directly to the surface, and so the only one you can reconstruct after everything else peeled off.
Obviously the shading and more subtle layered colours can't be reconstructed because they were applied onto the basecoat, so with those reconstructions you're just left with a flat basic colour.

Are you really so narrow minded that you cannot grasp that people had different beauty standards in other times and places? Are you also appalled by the fact that people used to wear funny looking wigs?

>at least on the base coat
well thats the problem

>>> /pol/

>implying feather dinosaurs arent cool as fuck

This would be like reconstructing The Creation of Adam by drawing the guide lines and then scoffing at how shit renaissance frescos were.

You retards realize this is only the base coat right? They can only get samples of the paint that came in contact with the stone.

They probably resembled Christian statues which are also painted

There was ONLY a base coat, or barely any more, considering how expensive and scarce the materials were

Even cultures who painted statues in base colors used multiple coats as was the case with indigenous people in Canada.

There is zero reason to believe they only used one base coat seeing as even Egyptian decorations had many coatings.. Scarcity of materials you just pulled out of your ass

I want it.
>ywn eat fried dinosaur, dinosaur wings...

Why were Egyptians so much better?

>File: true-colors-of-greek-statues-4.jpg (89 KB, 630x526)

>greek

HHMMM...

To be fair it was technically sculpted by Greek masters.

This actually looks nice.

Damn rigth

only a faggot would want his dinosaurs featherless

Comparing apples to oranges, Egyptian art was highly stylistic, and strict, so while the Greco-Roman artists were competing on who can produce the best art, Ancient Egyptian artists were competing on who can reproduce the same art best.

This lead to a lot of experimentation in Greco-Roman art, and eventually lead to realism, while Egyptian art remained stagnant for thousands of years, and produced very few master pieces.

The Nefertiti bust is one of those rare master pieces, but it was made in Dynastic Egypt's only experimental period, the Amarna. So you can't really use it as proof of Egyptian artistic superiority, though it's proof of what could have been, had the Amarna experiment succeeded.

>this makes me almost as sad as dinosaurs with feathers
Feather dinosaurs are way better wtf

The bust of Nefertiti was made during the second half of the Amarna period when the early "experimental" phase had sort of passed, at least in sculpture. Egyptian art often followed tbs pattern of experimentation followed by a return to orthodoxy, like in the First Intermediate Period followed by the reunification of Lower and Upper Egypt.

It looks rather Hindoo

>presumably Greeks
Definitely. Roman painting and mosaic owes as much to the Greeks as Roman sculpture.

...

...

I think it's safe to assume that they looked more like this than what has been posted so far

...