My pareidolia knows no bounds.

More
18 years 1 month ago #16129 by Larry Burford
Actually the "official" purpose of this site is the discussion of the subset of physics known as astronomy and cosmology, with an emphasis on Meta Model, Exploded Planet and Pushing Gravity issues. But obviously we drift to other (at least loosely related) areas from time to time. The phenomenon of seeing specific images that give the impression of intelligent design and/or intelligent construction where such things are unlikely (Mars) or impossible (clouds) is not strictly astronomy. But it is realted to it via the Mars connection so this moderator is inclined to continue drifting in this particular direction.

To paraphrase a humorous movie scene - "Consistency? We don't need no stinking consistency." Except of course where it is really necessary. Being a moderator is not as easy as it looks. But it is as fun as it looks.

===

Samizdat (or anyone else): If we need to discuss this in more detail, it would probably be appropriate to start a new thread for that purpose. Comments?

LB

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 years 1 month ago #16131 by rderosa
Replied by rderosa on topic Reply from Richard DeRosa
I came across an interesting story about Van Gogh in the New York Times from 1987 called:

ART VIEW; THE FACES THAT HAUNT VAN GOGH'S LANDSCAPES By MICHAEL BRENSON Published: January 4, 1987

I point this out, because it seems like this may be another case of an artist whose inspiration came from "finding" as in the quote that pareidoliac posted from Picasso.

query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=...37A35752C0A961948260

Excerpts:

"Of the issues that suggest the problem in distinguishing between the rational and irrational in van Gogh's work, none has more urgency than the one of ''secondary imagery.'' The phrase refers to images that are rarely noticed at first glance, that refuse to get lost once they are found, and whose meaning, importance, or role is hard to define. Van Gogh's landscapes are inhabited. What faces and heads are doing in his trees and clouds, whether they were intended - and indeed whether they are even there - are questions that can mobilize impressive rational and irrational resources. What cannot be denied after this show is that these faces and heads exist."

"The most expressive and revealing of the secondary images may be the heads and faces in trees. Van Gogh's identification with trees grows out of, but goes far beyond, Corot. Indeed the foliage in van Gogh's paintings is so alive, so much a cauldron of primal energy, darkness and light, that it shoots us back to the ages of animism and tree worship described by James George Frazer in ''The Golden Bough.'' It is in the trees that we see most clearly the degree to which van Gogh personified and projected himself into the natural world."

"There are faces in profile, mouth open, hair pulled back, in the great ''Pine Trees with Setting Sun.'' This may be the most Chinese work in the show, and Chinese landscape painting, inspired by natural philosophy, has been inhabited by secondary images for centuries."

"There are also different kinds of secondary imagery in ''Olive Tree with the Alpilles in the Background.'' In the tree just below the maternal cloud there is a head facing left. The head is the foliage. With its mouth open, it seems to be howling like a wolf, or nibbling leaves like a deer, or preaching to the cluster of trees around it. "

"Secondary imagery is a messy and controversial subject. In part because there is almost no preparation for it in any form or period of art history, with the notable exception of Surrealism, it is easily mocked and abused. The strong reactions it provokes expose the profound ambivalence about artistic control that is characteristic of this culture's relationship with art."

See 3 page article:

query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=...60&sec=&pagewanted=1
rd

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 years 1 month ago #16132 by rderosa
Replied by rderosa on topic Reply from Richard DeRosa
When I first posted this image, some thought it might be fraudulent:

File Attachment:


It was taken by Mark D. Phillips, photojournalist for the Associated Press. It's a great story. And it's very real. For anyone who's interested, here it is. It's called "Satan in the Smoke", and it's been transmitted all around the world. It was even transmitted in real time.

It's called "Is It Real? A Photographer in the Digital Age. Chapter 1":
www.markdphillips.com/isitreal.html

And here's his bio:
www.markdphillips.com/markbio.html
rd

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 years 1 month ago #17677 by Samizdat
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rderosa</i>
<br />When I first posted this image, some thought it might be fraudulent:



It was taken by Mark D. Phillips, photojournalist for the Associated Press. It's a great story. And it's very real. For anyone who's interested, here it is. It's called "Satan in the Smoke", and it's been transmitted all around the world. It was even transmitted in real time.

It's called "Is It Real? A Photographer in the Digital Age. Chapter 1":
www.markdphillips.com/isitreal.html

And here's his bio:
www.markdphillips.com/markbio.html
rd
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

If only sports television crews with their expensive super slow motion production capability had raced to the World Trade Center and given us orders of magnitude more stills in which to find imaginary monsters! Then we could spend even more time, energy, and bandwidth on this nonsense.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 years 1 month ago #16133 by pareidoliac
Replied by pareidoliac on topic Reply from fred ressler
The Mark Phillips photo is fairly famous by now. It further goes to show how few people actually see with their pareidolic, and extra-pareidolic eyes. i have seen no mention on the face, (in the chin and below) in the main image along with it's neck and body, and the anguished looking face (like Munch's "Scream, "with a down-turned anguished mouth below that, (in the body of the midle image.) Also please note the classical cruxifix im the mouth-nose portion of the middle face) for those who are into "religious," pareidolia.
There is also a face with a "star," in it's mouth in the far upper-right; as well as many additional scattered faces.
This all adds fuel to the assertion that pareidolia is the great overlooked center where the physical and spiritual world meet and communicate, sending messages from the highest spirit in it's infinite hidden subtelty. i believe the whole pareidolic phenomena is worthy of far more investigation than has been given to it at this point. It seems like a perfect area for "meta-research."

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 years 1 month ago #17428 by Samizdat
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by pareidoliac</i>
<br />The Mark Phillips photo is fairly famous by now. It further goes to show how few people actually see with their pareidolic, and extra-pareidolic eyes. i have seen no mention on the face, (in the chin and below) in the main image along with it's neck and body, and the anguished looking face (like Munch's "Scream, "with a down-turned anguished mouth below that, (in the body of the midle image.) Also please note the classical cruxifix im the mouth-nose portion of the middle face) for those who are into "religious," pareidolia.
There is also a face with a "star," in it's mouth in the far upper-right; as well as many additional scattered faces.
This all adds fuel to the assertion that pareidolia is the great overlooked center where the physical and spiritual world meet and communicate, sending messages from the highest spirit in it's infinite hidden subtelty. i believe the whole pareidolic phenomena is worthy of far more investigation than has been given to it at this point. It seems like a perfect area for "meta-research."
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> -- or <b>meta</b>physics.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.324 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum