|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
David Shields
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2005 - 11:47 am: | 
|
Hi there,
Thought I'd have a go at reconstructing Mary. |
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 517
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 1:00 pm: |
|
HI David,
That is totally excellent. Is there any way you can take it a step or two further? I appreciate the problems, believe me, but that is incredibly good as far as you have taken it.
I honestly think that is spot on.
Any chance at all of you going all out and trying a colour portrait, because I would really love to see how it came out.
Apart from the fact that I think you have got her about as right as anyone can under the circumstances, I think that you have managed to get a poignancy and sense of reality that is quite eerie.
I can almost see Mary there, allowing for the fact that it shows her with her eyes shut and some bruising and swelling to the face. Exactly how she would have looked if her face had been left intact.
Looking at the post mortem pictures of the later victims from that area, like Alice McKenzie and Frances Coles, there is a chilling similarity.
I'll stop gushing now David, but it was worth a gush. More please.
Jane
xxxxx |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3901
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 1:30 pm: |
|
Hi David,
I agree with Jane, it is worth a gush indeed.
It does look very realistic in a way a 19th century photograph would look like, and I also think you've got the proportions entirely correct in the facial structure, based on the very distorted vision we can get of the skull.
Maybe - if I may - her features look a bit too masculine and I would think that on those places where a skull in general don't give us much information, like the nose tip, the cheeks and the lips, she might have had more delicate, slender and feminine features, espeically considering her young age.
But otherwise very good and convincing from a realistic point of view. Thanks for charing this with us.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 12, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 213
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 3:50 pm: |
|
Great job!
Agree with Glenn, but a great effort nevertheless. Please do go on! Loose the bruises and give her slightly more femininity, and it would be the best reconstruction ever IMO.
Helge
"Logic is the beginning of wisdom; not the end." -- Spock (Star Trek VI)
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1019
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 3:58 pm: |
|
I disagree. I think you are projecting your ideas of a pretty woman on her and therefore, want her to appear delicate.
I prefer his interpretation.
Nice job David.
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 215
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 4:39 pm: |
|
Actually I have no preconceived ideas about how Mary should look.
But the "bruise" on her cheek is obvious (to me) because of a flap of skin sticking out in the original picture, and does give the face a more squarish look than it probably had in real life.
But, Ally, you have a good point. That is why I said "slightly" more femininity..
But maybe this is as far as we can go without adding too much "fantasy"..
hmmm..
Helge
(Message edited by helge on August 12, 2005)
"Logic is the beginning of wisdom; not the end." -- Spock (Star Trek VI)
|
George Hutchinson
Chief Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 642
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 5:09 pm: |
|
Hi David.
WOW!!!!!
I agree with Ally here. I don't think she looks too masculine at all. I find Jane's Mary is slightly square-jawed as well. I feel the two go hand in hand very nicely.
This is a really disturbing piece of work and incredibly good. Truly astounding in fact.
You have a fan here!
It is almost a shame - in the most unpleasant way - that she was the only victim to have undergone such facial mutilation as I would love to see you do this on another image too.
I guess the MJK shot is unique in that she may well be the only famous murder victim where we have no other guide to her appearance.
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3904
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 5:42 pm: |
|
"I think you are projecting your ideas of a pretty woman on her and therefore, want her to appear delicate."
Eerh... I can't speak for Helge, but... no, that is not it, Ally. Not at all.
Sorry to crush your prejudices about male interpretations and expectations.
I for my part am not a fan of romanticism and idolising.
All I meant was that I think the nose and the mouth looks a bit masculine for a woman of her age and who is 'supposed' to look relatively pretty. That's all. She DID seem to have a squarish face, though, so that is not it.
But otherwise it's an incredible piece of work and I certainly couldn't create something like that myself out of the terrible mess of flesh and skin we see in the original photo. It shall also be noted that David has chosen to reproduce her in a very difficult angle and position on a crime scene.
It really surprises me how someone can actually create features from a skull where most of the details are hidden to such an extent (due to the flesh and skin flaps) and still make it come out VERY anatomically correct - as far as I can see. Although we can onlu speculate to some point, I'd say Jane's interpretation feels most convincing than any others that has been produced so far, but this one comes on a very close second place. Every interpretation and attempt has its own priceless value, which on the other hand might make it wrong to compared two different art interpretations with each other.
Besides that, we can only guess.
I certainly want to see more of David's great stuff and I should also want to know how he did it, because the effect is interesting and very appealing - it actually looks like a photograph (well, it is originally a photograph of course, but you know what I mean...). Amazing.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 12, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 518
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 6:58 pm: |
|
Hi All,
Having looked at it next to mine, I have to say I think that they are actually very similar indeed in most aspects. Which I suppose it should be if David and I both used the same method and based it on the same photo.
The forehead I think is practically the same in both his and mine, quite short and fairly square.
The jaw I think I might have a fraction squarer, but only marginally and allowing for the fact that David's version is her post mortem and mine was alive, they are reasonably close. the chin itself I think is really the same as far as I can see.
The nose again, is very much the same kind of nose, possibly a little more fleshy in Davids, but very similar in essence.
The eyes the same width apart and about the same size and the eyebrows low and close to the eyes.
The mouth a little fuller perhaps in his, but allowing for post mortem distortion very close I think.
This was why I was interested in seeing David take this further, because I really think that his version and mine are extremely close, if one takes into account bruising etc., I think that was why I was so stunned.
So please let's have a version of her in life David, I am dying to see how she looks.
Big hug
Jane
xxxxx |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3909
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 7:17 pm: |
|
Well, to some extent I certainly agree with you, Jane. Yours and David's versions appear to be similar on several points, which itself is amazing.
I concur, that I would like to see David's rendering of her in life too, because while dead, a person tends to create unnatural facial expressions, which make it sometimes very hard to see how the person looked like while alive. We only have to take a look at the morgue photos of the Ripper victims in order to conclude that. Those are generally not the most flattering situations in which a person can be depicted.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 12, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2279
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 7:52 pm: |
|
Hi David,
I was very impressed indeed with your very realistic and unromantic but quite remarkable interpretation.
I do believe that the police illustration we have available from 1888 is a hugely helpful guide to how she may have looked.This shows her with a squarish/ round face,chubby cheeks,a fleshy nose, her eyes not far apart -but if anything close together.This I believe would have been how her friends and aquaintences "described" her to the police illustrator.Indeed it says so quite clearly underneath that police illustration of her.Now just how near that illustrator came to getting a true likeness we shall probably never know, but at least we can deduce from it the "features" her friends described.As an artist myself who has also received training in portraiture
it is my view that your "reconstruction" may be
very close indeed to how Mary actually looked. |
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1020
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 7:53 pm: |
|
Uh Glenn,
I said this: ""I think you are projecting your ideas of a pretty woman on her"
You said that you "think the nose and the mouth looks a bit masculine for a woman of her age and who is 'supposed' to look relatively pretty."
In other words, you have your ideas of what a pretty woman is, and that ain't it. As I said, you are projecting your ideas of what a pretty woman is her, you even said so, so it's hardly my prejudices clouding my interpretations.
Cheers,
|
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 255
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 9:32 pm: |
|
Good job David!
I've wondered if Mary was really all that pretty by today's standards. The other victims went on the streets much later in life so she'd been out there for about as long as them. Add in a lifetime of exposure to the elements and poor diet along with maybe a decade of heavy drinking as well as a few bouts with venereal disease and it would have to exact a toll.
Best wishes,
Stan |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3912
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 9:51 pm: |
|
Let's all remember that a skull does not give us much information about more fleshy parts like eyelids, ears, lips - not to mention details like eyebrows - and nose tip. This is a common problem for anyone who tries to reconstruct from such appaling circumstances as the Millers Court picture provides. And regarding those parts one can always have opinions.
As for the contemporary illustrations showing the female victims, I'd say they're horrible and provides us with no clue at all. They are a disgrace. We have several different sketches of Mary Kelly, and worst of all, they don't corroborate with each other at all and sometimes one wonders if they show the same person. Just look at how the so called artist for Illustrated Police News depicted Elisabeth Stride, where she looked nothing like the original on the morgue photo at all, and in fact less flattering. I'd say that artist was very good at sketching environments but completely hopeless when it came to doing female portraits. The same goes for modern 'phantom pictures' created by the police by their own artists or in a computer program, where they hardly even look like human beings.
It is a beautiful and pretty convincing picture that David has created, though, and I agree with Natalie that it is refreshing that it is unromantic. I am particularly impressed by the technique he's used and I really love the photorealism it has created.
I for my part would love to see more of David's work and see what he can do more with it, because I do believe he is on the right track. Anyone who has the guts to recreate Mary Kelly, considering the hopeless circumstances, is brave and deserves to get credit from that - and personally I wouldn't have the balls to do it. So good job indeed and please keep 'em coming, David.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 12, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
George Hutchinson
Chief Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 643
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 3:28 am: |
|
Glenn -
"Anyone who has the guts to recreate Mary Kelly"
An unfortunate turn of phrase. I would leave that to Shoreditch Mortuary.
I agree with you about period illustrations. I'm not aware of any reason why we should trust any sketch of her in any of the popular pulp press.
David - any follow-up to our responses???
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 219
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 3:34 am: |
|
Just a quick comment for what it is worth.
The eyes here certainly does not seem close together.. for one thing. I absolutely agree with Glenn that the police scetches are worth nothing. Actually this picture seem to prove that!
I have no romanticized image in my head about how Mary could have looked. Actually I have a very respectfull attitude towards all of the Rippers (or whoever it was, eyyh, Glenn  ) victims. Life was hard and it took its toll.
If anything, I think this image of MJK radiates strenght. I know this is subjective, but whatever. We certainly have a beautiful woman here, regardless.
What I was thinking (and I may be wrong) is that perhaps what I called the "bruise" on her cheek makes her face look slightly more squarish than it would have in life.
This makes for outstanding realism in a "post mortem" type drawing, but if a "in life" rendering was attempted, should probably be downplayed.
I am no expert here, and speak only for my own part. However, having seen some of Glenn's own work, which is outstanding, btw, I feel more confident in that we actually agree on something here!
At any rate, this rendering is remarkable so far, and I should include that Janes' is also. We are lucky to have some really gifted people here on Casebook!
If I were to attempt this, I would be lucky to end up with something like:
Helge
"Logic is the beginning of wisdom; not the end." -- Spock (Star Trek VI)
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2280
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 6:15 am: |
|
Helge,
I am conscious here that you are intent on rubbishing what I said about the police illustration being helpful to me -helpful that is when I was doing a painting of Mary Kelly which as you may know is on the thread which I myself began-[the Art/Whitechapel thread]. I had spent long hours over a drawing of her the previous Winter -also on the thread-in which I had not used the illustration as I hadnt known it existed
at that time.But when it came to "painting" her face-in oils on canvass-I noticed that there was a large centre illustration in the "Police Illustrated News-Law Courts and Weekly record" which contained the information underneath that it had been put together
"from descriptions given by her intimate friends".
I do agree though that numerous of the illustrations we are presented with appear amateur
although as you may know an "illustrators" work will often not necessarilly be a "work of art" and will follow a more "photographic"type of presentation than would an artist"s schooled in the methods of "Fine Art".This was especially true then but it is still true now and the work of an illustrator will still mostly fall into the category of graphic design.
Over the last few decades its true the two forms of art have merged but lately what with the current exhibition at the cutting edge" Saachi Gallery"entitled "The Triumph of Painting"and various pronouncements and other exhibitions at the Tate Modern" etc - painting -thankfully as far as I am concerned ,has made a come back of late.
I say all this because I have studied painting for many years-both as a young student at Art School and from the point of view of Art History and also at the Central London Art Schools and the subject means a lot to me.
I am aware that you did not mention my own portrait of Mary and I understand well that this may be far from how you and others envisage her or like to see her portrayed.Certainly I romanticised her and I dont regret that but neither can I claim a realistic presentation either as can be seen in David"s work and very beautifully as has been mentioned in Jane"s.
As it hasppens I am not particularly pleased with it anyway- I found the process a nightmare.
I hasten to add that I too adore Jane"s work which is absolutely brilliant.Glenn"s too is very impressive work and there are several others on here with masses of talent Suzi,Robert etc.but Helge your words touched a rather sensitive nerve-I do know something about Art -possibly you do too-I happen to disagree with you and others about that police illustration the likeness of which was said to come from descriptions given by friends.
AP
---Thankyou AP for all you have ever said about my paintings....I hold onto your kind reviews and take your words with me as I struggle to paint ......
Natalie
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 221
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 7:13 am: |
|
Natalie,
I did not intend to rubbish what you said whatsoever!
I was just expressing an opinion. I have no talent in painting or drawing whatsoever, but I may have opinions nevertheless. If I hit a nerve, sorry.
But I still think most of the drawings from 1888 is rubbish. Maybe I'm wrong on that particular one you mention. I don't know. Normally I don't really follow up on the art threads. I have not even seen your rendering.
Ok, I don't really have anything else to say on this subject, so I'll go back to pestering Glenn somewhere..
Helge
"Logic is the beginning of wisdom; not the end." -- Spock (Star Trek VI)
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 519
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 9:16 am: |
|
Hi all,
Just a thought about how pretty or healthy Mary may have looked in life. Mary was a real survivor and I think she would have looked after herself pretty well as a rule.
If we look at her history, Joe was earning a pretty good wage as a Market porter until a few months before Mary was killed.......I suspect they ate reasonably well until he lost his job and had enough left over for a good few gins at the end of it. It would have only been in the last few months they would have had to cut back and their diet may have suffered.
Before that she was being looked after by other men who would have been able to provide at least a fair diet and living conditions.
Working backwards through her past there would always seem to be conditions that were a bit above the standard that many of the time would have enjoyed.
Although Mary may not have been at her best in those last few months, it would not have been long enough for her to go too far downhill. Just my opinion.
The only other thing I thought was that in death, the cheek muscles totally lose their tension and that usually accounts for the sagging effect that one gets in post mortem photos.
If you see the pm photo of Marilyn Monroe, you would hardly recognise her as the incredibly beautiful woman she was in life. Her cheeks have lost all shape and form and she appears very puffy. I think David has captured that look absolutely perfectly in his reconstruction of Mary.
Love Jane
xxxxxxx
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 520
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 9:28 am: |
|
HI Natalie,
I have to say I absolutely love your portrait of Mary........different to mine certainly, but she still has a real quality that is easily perceived as being our Mary.
It is the expression on her face that seems very poignant and captures some of the sadness she felt. I was thinking of some of the last words she said to the young girl that visited her.........'whatever you do......don't turn out as I did.'
I actually if anything like the first pencil drawing of Mary that you did earlier even more. It was extremely touching.......there is such a quality about that which makes me feel sad for Mary every time I look at it.
And surely that is what art is all about, drawing out people's emotions and making them feel what you want them to feel when you paint the picture.
I love all of the work that is posted here by yourself, Suzi, Glenn of course and others as they bring a different aspect to the victims and suspects and make an impressive gallery when they are all put together.
Everyone keep posting pictures please.......
Love and hugs Jane
xxxxxx |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3913
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 10:18 am: |
|
Hutch,
"An unfortunate turn of phrase. I would leave that to Shoreditch Mortuary."
Ouch. You're right. Hmmm... Well, I think you know what I meant...
Natalie,
It is quite possible that the picture you refer to might have been based on descriptions from people who knew her, but that doesn't help if the artist isn't capable of delivering it and make her look like a human being.
I think it is quite clear just by looking at them, that many of the artists that worked for the illustrated papers were very good in general (especially in drawing buildings and creating an atmosphere) and had a beautiful lively style, but as far as depicting people - especially female - they were absolutely worthless. There were a few that were good, like the one (whoever it was) who made the sketch from the inquest, showing Kidney and Stride's landlady. Those are very good portraits.
But the way Kelly and the other victims are portrayed in Illustrated Police News is an absolute scandal. I have an art education myself, and all I can say is that the artist in question had no sense of how to capture facial features whatsoever. There are at least three contemporary head portraits of Mary Kelly, and they are not similar to one another one bit. I don't think we can rely on them at all, maybe except for clothing details etc.
As for your own picture of Mary Kelly, as I recall, I found it quite good and made with a sensitive eye.
As Jane says, everyone's interpretations are valuable and helps to bring life into the memory of these individuals.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 13, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2281
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 10:27 am: |
|
Helge,
I understand what you are saying.Lets forget it-just a stupid tantrum of mine!
David has not done the eyes close together as I have taken to be a possible feature from these "descriptions" of November 17th 1888.
Whatever he has done certainly weaves amazingly well into what we see left of her in the photograph.Add to that what Jane correctly points out regarding the puffiness I have heard spoken of before regarding the post mortem photograph of M.M. and I do believe we are very close indeed.
Jane,
You really are so very perceptive and understanding.Many Thanks for your sweet words which have very much cheered me up since such words of appreciation from yourself is praise indeed!
I think you may have a point about Mary"s appearance "in the flesh" since Walter Dew remembered her as "pretty and buxom" with a fresh appearance[I think that he partly meant her neat,white apron here].But also Elizabeth Prater described her as "tall" and "fair as a lilly"which I doubt she would have said quite so enthusiastically if Mary had been very plain or looking haggard and old before her time.
Alcohol ,astonishingly often seems to have a beneficial effect on the complexion-a bit
like TB used to and her complexion may have been all that Elizabeth Prater implies!
And it wasnt only her facial skin that drew attention but others commented also on her "fine head of waist length hair", hair being quick to dry and split off if unhealthy.
I agree that most of the illustrations of the
period,particularly of the victims are frightful.
Liz Stride looks nothing like her mortuary photo which you further enlightened us with in your portrait of her.And poor Catherine,well-pegged up, sewn up-no opportunity to wax away the
bikini line-no wonder poor old John said she looked like a pig cut up for market!
The main thing is though,as you rightly say,
we need to keep on trying ....already yours and David"s seem to have caught something that rings true ,somthing that rhymes with the post mortem photo"s hints and shadows - what may be helpful next is a model in clay .....Jane.....David....what do you think?
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4778
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 10:41 am: |
|
Glenn, we agreed some time ago that Coles's sketch was good. But some of the illustrators....well, PC Thompson looks like an SS stormtrooper.
Robert |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2282
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 11:28 am: |
|
Hi Glenn,
I am not over bothered at all regarding my own portraits of Mary actually.The painting looks rather better "in the flesh" because it is so reduced in size,[ from a metre by a metre],that the modelling and shading on it are nearly invisible, some of the colours so completely different[the red for example] that when reproduced on this cheap computer of mine made it a bit of a silly idea to postit at all.
Also as I worked on her ravaged face and saw the death she had had to endure I felt compelled [or the painting compelled me if you like], to over-compensate when trying to restore some of her recognisable humanness and dignity, abandoning realism in the process ---even though I had tried to base it on what I could glean of her features from that damned illustration!
However that is not what I was on about actually.
David,by sticking faithfully to what his optical nerve was recording has indeed pulled off something quite remarkable. [Jane"s was btw also just as remarkable but in a different way-for this was how Mary may have looked alive and vibrant].
But David"s has not left the death scene rather he has stayed with it -----and stared it out!He is not alone-others have tried and produced impressive results too...but somehow here by a stroke of genius, we seem to have something here that really looks like it could be it
A clay reconstruction of this may well lead us to her life image-IMHO!!!!
Natalie
ps
.. despite that artists rather unappealing 1888 illustration in that Police Newspaper, we may still be able to learn a little from it you know-just because it is unappealing doesnt mean its totally inaccurate.
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3915
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 11:59 am: |
|
Robert,
That's true. Those of Coles and Sadler are very good. In fact, they are excellent.
I don't know where they initially were reproduced, though. Doesn't look like the style generally seen in Illustrated Police News.
The illustrated tabloids seemed to differ in quality to some extent.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 943
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 2:11 pm: |
|
David,
I'm ringing in late here, but that is almost exactly the way I have always imagined Mary.
Andy S. |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3916
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 3:00 pm: |
|
Ally,
I just thought (based on my experience as a portrait painter for many years depicting a lot of people in different age groups) that some VERY FEW elements (where the skull does not give us any information) in David's picture appear to have a bit too masculine features for any woman of 25, as I see it. I may be right, I may be wrong, but it is my opinion.
It has nothing to do with my male 'interpretation' of Mary Kelly as a 'pretty' woman as far as my own taste is concerned, or any expectations or personal preferences, as you THOUGHT it did in your rather condescending comment.
I have no idea what you think I implied in my post, but in any case it is entirely incorrect.
Besides that, David's picture is in its anatomical foundation more correct than one can expect from such a difficult subject, and subsequently a job very well done - and probably very close to the truth.
And beautiful as well as respectful in its own right, without any unnecessary glorification. It is impossible not to get touched by it.
"Otherwise I'll just think you are a typical, blockhead of a male who can't think straight whenever there's a pretty woman involved."
Thank you for proving my point.
Enough said.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 13, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 223
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 3:14 pm: |
|
Natalie,
Allready forgotten. We seem to agree that sticking with the forensics of the photograph may lead to the best realism.
It is easy to get lost in emotions here, isn't it? Looking at the faces of the victims kind of makes us remember what this is all about. Its not just the Ripper. It's these women and how they lived as well..
Helge
"Logic is the beginning of wisdom; not the end." -- Spock (Star Trek VI)
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1022
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 3:17 pm: |
|
Glenn,
I never once said your male interpretation did I? No, I didn't. That was your spin, not mine.
As for your assertion that your opinions are purely art based, yeah I heard those lines when I was in college. They went something along the lines of "Hey baby, I'm an artist, it'd be purely for art's sake."
As for my "condescending post" that in your opinion was just trying to pick a fight, no one seemed to take it in that spirit but you. The other gent took it in the spirit it was meant: that everyone has a different definition of what MJK would have looked like and mine didn't mesh with yours.
And lastly, as for my parting comment, it's such a shame that no one has any appreciation for irony anymore or perhaps the cognitive ability to recognize it.
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2283
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 3:43 pm: |
|
Helge,
Yes,exactly so.My mother earned her living as a portrait painter and was very successful.But almost always she was forced by those who commissioned her work to paint the subject in a more flattering light than was real or true as a representation of them.The women were "flattered" in a way that
usually corresponded to how their husband"s, who were paying for the painting, wanted to see their wives as portrayed,usually decoratively,the men themselves usually wanted to be depicted according to their status and power.Mum got sick and tired of the "prettifying" and elevation of "status" and gave it up after a dozen or so years to work as an Art Therapist.
Ally is absolutely right in my view, for whether Glenn likes it or not,there is a prevailing tendency to "want" your own idea prettiness/ beauty/femininity depicted when it comes to portraying Mary especially ---I am guilty of it myself,whereas the only way we will ever reach her is by sticking rigorously to what the optic nerve reports.....tricky though that is in the case of Mary.It was really quite a shock to see David"s work this morning when I went on line----yet I knew immediately that we were onto something scrupulously close to the truth.
Natalie |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3287
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 4:59 pm: |
|
Can we please be courteous enough to Mr. Shields to stick to the topic at hand without delving into petty squabbles? Seriously, take a pill.
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3288
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 5:00 pm: |
|
By the way, David, great work. Personally I think its jibes quite well with the descriptions handed down by people who knew Mary.
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 1:13 pm: |
|
David,
The nose may need a bit of attention - it's a bit upturned and leans too much towards Mary's right cheek - but excellent work nonetheless. You've captured the "slightly plump" description that was given by a number of witnesses and, correctly I think, made her less square-jawed than some seem to believe.
Anyway, in an effort to make her nose a little less "retrousse" I've doctored your last frame in my own amateurish way, if you don't mind.
 |
David Shields
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 12:26 pm: |
|
Hi folks,
I must say I didn't think I'd cause such a stir with something I did in twenty minutes at work! Thanks for all your comments, they're much appreciated. Perhaps I will take it a stage further now.
I've only just discovered this site and I think it's a great source of information on something I've always been fascinated by.
The image was retouched in photoshop using colour burn to bring out more depth then gentle overlay of semi transparent brushstrokes. I work as a graphic designer but trained in fine art painting (which probably helps with the realism). I'm off to search for the other interpretations you mentioned now!
David. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2387
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 5:15 pm: |
|
You know, some of us girls might look like Mike Tyson, but it is personality that shines through.
Christ! I look like the rear end of a pug these days but I hope that someone, somewhere sees the beauty.
I thought it a fair portrait of someone who might drink a bucket of gin before breakfast. |
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 521
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 5:57 pm: |
|
Hi David,
Here are the links to Natalies and my interpretation of Mary, but there are others on the site. I hope Nats doesn't mind me putting this up, but I am sure she would like you to see her portrait of her, which I think is great.
I do have most if not all of the comtemporary illustrations of Mary and I will dig them out and post them if no -one gets there before me.
Big hug jane
xxxxxx
Here's Natalies first sketch which I truly love
../9175/10022.html"../9175/18205.html" target=_top>../9175/18205.html"../9175/16177.html" target=_top>../9175/16177.html"#DEDDCE"> |
George Hutchinson
Chief Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 645
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 6:00 pm: |
|
Ah, AP... always changing gender...
Steve - thanks for intervening here. It is always such a pity that almost every thread gets infected with just plain pedantic personal bitchiness. It is tiring, boring and no one is interested. I wish such things were kept to private e-mails after the first reply.
David - I have another suggestion for you. We all know the image of PN is a very poor quality one and could really do with improvement. What do you say? I have a pretty good large copy of it sent to me by Rob Clack if you want me to forward it to you for work (send me a private e-mail if so).
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3917
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 6:06 pm: |
|
David!
So it WAS Photoshop?
Good work! Sometimes I get the feeling it's the only software you need for computer artwork (unless it's 3D work). And did you really say twenty minutes?
I somehow could sense that you were trained in fine art painting indeed. It is all there in the technique and it shines through.
I seldom use Photoshop for more than polishing photographs of bad original quality, and I have never tried colour burn in this particular context, but yes, I can recognise the use of semi-transparent brushstrokes in order to create soft realism. Very interesting result.
It will indeed be interesting to see where you're going to take this further. Don't be a stranger and keep us posted.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2288
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 6:10 pm: |
|
Thanks Philip,
Anyway I am off to bed with a sore head now after
all this.
Sorry you were so "tired" and "bored" by it all...
Nats
x |
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 522
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 6:29 pm: |
|
HI David,
Here are the pics I have of Mary from contemporary sources. There is another one of her with Hutchinson's man as a line drawing but I don't think it is worth posting as she could be anybody in it.
The first one is the one with the fringe and there are a few things that trouble me about this picture.......
The first is the fringe. Looking at the post mortem photo, I really don't feel that she was wearing a fringe at this particular time, even if she did on other occassions.
Allowing for the fact that her hair was obviously clotted with all sorts and may have been used to hold her head.....yes horrible thought.......I still get the feeling that it looks as if the fringe is too long to have been worn down at this time.
I think that her hairstyle was swept back from her face or her fringe grown out somewhat. Just a personal opinion.
I am certain that the chin in the illustration is totally wrong as it is far too narrow and has a cleft in it, which even allowing for the mutilations isn't there in the pm photo.
Her nose if far too long in it and the gap between the nose and lips not long enough.
Her lips are also quite a bit wider and fuller than given her.
I don't think her eyes were that close together either.
I do wonder too about the plumpness of the cheeks.
She was described as plump and buxom, but looking at her limbs in the pm photo they do not appear to be that plump by any means and somehow the fullness of her face her seems incongruous with the limbs in the photograph and the overall shape of her face or what is left of it.
Other than that it is a wonderful portrait!
The other two illustrations I am afraid don't do much for me either for various reasons, but they are worth a look anyway.
I really do think that you have got it just about right in essence and I will send you a whole packet of chokkie bikkies if you will do a life portrait of her. (I might nibble one or two first)
Love Jane
xxxx
 |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2290
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 6:48 pm: |
|
Hey Jane-now!Naughty ,naughty, I never did say it was a wonderful portrait....please now.... |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3919
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 6:58 pm: |
|
Hi Jane,
I think the three enclosed pictures in your post (which in fact are the ones I referred to earlier) shows just exactly what I was trying to say earlier about the police illustrations.
It is hard to even imagine that they portray the same woman, isn't it? Three totally different interpretations!
I must say the first one is beyond contempt as far as I am concerned. It is just horrible. She looks like she's swallowed a big potato and I don't think she even looks like a human being. Why am I not surprised it is the Illustrated Police News! Her head is too round and she is probably way too plump. And where is her jaw (as you point out)?
I like the second one better, but it contains a couple of serious question marks. I feel this to be a too much idolised picture and her clothes are wrong and she also wears a hat. But at least - although it's a true example of Victorian generalisation - it is a bit more realistic, although probably incorrect. One gets the feeling it is built on contemporary ideals.
The third and last one is probably the one I feel is most convincing. I am not sure how well it fits in with the bone structure of the skull (the face might be too thin and the jaw line not squarish enough), but as far as I am concerned, this is at least not a portrait created from Victorian stereotypes and ideals, but actually contains some life and realism. Compared to the others, it is also the only one that displays character and some kind of attempt to catch the person's psychology.
Then, if any of them really can be considered correct from a true anatomical and factual point of view, is another question. To be honest, I doubt it. It certainly would have helped, at least, if they had shown SOME corroborating points with each other!
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 13, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 523
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 7:12 pm: |
|
Hee hee Nats,
Only joking......... to tell you the truth I think I know what might have happened when they were interviewing Mary's friends............
If for instance they asked a friend about her hair, one might have said.......'she wore a fringe', Okay, what is a fringe? Is it a long fringe like the one in the yellow picture above pulled back, or a fringe like the one in the first illustration from the Police News. They are both fringes.......so the artist drew a fringe.
I can almost see how he came up with the picture to be fair to him, and maybe not his fault......if her friends said she was plump, how plump is plump? We have seen the trouble witnesses have with descriptions of suspects.....let alone victims.
So to be fair to the artist, who is obviously talented in other areas, he may have just drawn what he was told.
I would love to have been a fly on the wall the following day when the friends who had described Mary saw the picture. Did they pull faces or nod in approval. Trouble is we will never know.
I actually like the yellow pic best for some reason......but I agree with Glenn that she is too narrow in the face and gaunt there. She looks tough though and resilient.....and she does have a fringe, albeit a tied back one.
Oh for a time machine.
And I was teasing a bit about that illustration. I do think he is a good artist that got derailed a bit by witnesses who might have been in a bit too much of a hurry.
Big hug Jane
xxxxx
I bet your cocoa's got cold by now....... |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3920
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 7:23 pm: |
|
Hi Jane,
So you like the yellow picture best too? Interesting.
As you say, might be too thin and narrow, and maybe a but too delicate, but it does contain some kind of spirit and personality. And I think SOME of the elements in the facial structure might actually fit the Millers Court picture to some degree, although apparently not entirely correct.
But as you say - oh, for a time machine.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4784
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 7:31 pm: |
|
In the one at the bottom she looks a bit French. In the one in the middle she looks a bit Cockney. And in the top one she looks a bit like Charles Laughton in drag.
Robert |
George Hutchinson
Chief Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 648
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 7:44 pm: |
|
Glenn -
I am willing to be corrected, but the only time I have seen the 3rd image is in the poorly produced populist map JACK'S LONDON, published in 1994 which also has similar images of the others by the same artist.
Consequently, I don't believe the third is contemporary - but it does prove a point about the probable poor standard of the others.
"She looks like she's swallowed a big potato" : I love it.
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3921
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 8:02 pm: |
|
Robert,
A wonderful summon-up!
Hutch,
Yes, I think you are right, now that you mention it. That third picture is probably not contemporary. Which could explain why it is so different in the style from those. Still, quite an interesting depiction attempt. As Robert says; she does look a bit French.
As for the potato comment; I almost wrote cabbage instead.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 13, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 524
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 8:04 pm: |
|
Hi Phil,
Well you live and learn..........I actually think that she does look very 70's comic book in that pic, so I would love to have that confirmed one way or the other. The mole on her cheek there is very much in that style.
Mind you having said that the one of Stride in that series is identical to the one in the contemporary press, which was why I thought they all were, and so was the one of Annie Chapman if my memory isn't playing tricks.
Anyone else any ideas on this? I wonder if he could find pics of some of them, but when it came to Mary he had the same ideas that we are having - that there were no really good contemporary pics of her and just did his own thing.
Very interesting...........
Hugs Jane
xxxx
(Message edited by jcoram on August 13, 2005) |
Harry Mann
Detective Sergeant
Username: Harry
Post Number: 137
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 5:07 am: |
|
Here is an amatuer at work,but I play around with photos to gain a little knowledge.Sledge it for all it's worth.
Apologies to David. |
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 722
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 5:16 am: |
|
I actually think that she does look very 70's comic book in that pic,...
That's exactly what I thought when I first saw it, Jane!
Frank
"There's gotta be a lot of reasons why I shouldn't shoot you, but right now I can't think of one."
- Clint Eastwood, in 'The Rookie' (1990)
|
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
