Breathtaking Historical Portraits Brought To Life Using AI Stuff

► In this video today, we are going to see historical portraits being colorized and brought to life as never seen before. Please don't freak out once they start moving. You're going to love it. They are breathtaking. In my previous colorization videos, we've seen how skilled individuals have brought life to black and white photos by adding colours in most spectacular ways. Today, we're going to try and add another layer of realism, by animating their faces in a subtle way, using Artificial Intelligence stuff. Don't expect perfection, but, oh boy, this is really cool and I needed to share it with you guys.

Please check video for more breathtaking historical portraits brought to life.

Featured in this video:
01. Anne Boleyn (c.1501 - 1536), Queen of England and Second Wife
of King Henry VIII. Modernised by Becca Saladin;
02. Anne of Cleves (1515 - 1557), Queen of England and Fourth Wife
of King Henry VIII. Modernised by Becca Saladin;
03. Queen Elizabeth I of England (1533 - 1603), Daughter of King Henry VIII & Anne Boleyn. Modernised by Becca Saladin;
04. Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865), 16th US President. Colour by Jecinci;
05. Chinese-Filipino woman taken by Dutch photographer Francisco Van Camp ca.1875. Colour by LoneSky;
06. Lone Walking Buffalo, Nakoda Nation, circa 1900. Colour by Marina Amaral;
07. Fridtjof Nansen (1861 - 1930), Norwegian explorer, scientist, diplomat, humanitarian and Nobel Peace Prize laureate. Colour by Marina Amaral;
08. Mata Hari (1876 - 1917). Dutch exotic dancer and courtesan, convicted of being a spy for Germany during World War I. Colour by Klimbim;
09. Young Joseph Stalin, At age 23, 1901. Colour by Marina Amaral;
10. Princess Ileana of Romania. Early 1920s. Also known as Mother Alexandra, great-granddaughter of Queen Victoria. Colour by Klimbim.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s_hIs8s_N4

That was 10 minutes of fascinating viewing.

Especially the first 3 women, usually only seen as severe historical faces, brought up to date with hair and make up, so those plain women were in reality pretty looking women similar to the girl next door or your next door neighbour.

Brilliant.

totally mesmerising syl.

i found another one of the same thing. you have to skip to 1 minute for the start of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXCYBsG6ork

gelico wrote:

totally mesmerising syl.

i found another one of the same thing.  you have to skip to 1 minute for the start of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXCYBsG6ork

Brilliant, I get really engrossed with these.

Here's another that followed on, not animated, but transformed to fit modern times.

Christina of Denmark (Duchess of Milan), Leonardo da Vinci, Mona Lisa, James VI and I, Anne of Denmark, Queen Anne of Great Britain and Hans Staden.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIX7o3tKstc

I wonder what it was about Mona Lisa that has captured peoples imagination for centuries?

Syl wrote:I wonder what it was about Mona Lisa that has captured peoples imagination for centuries?

The corner on the left side of her mouth (our right) makes for a peculiar, unaccustomed façade or look.  (Hence, the talk about the Mona Lisa smile.)

People are used to reading facial expressions as they are listening to vocal expressions.  Even a person who is silent (as women and children were supposed to be in 16th-century Europe) conveys a reaction or response to the conversation around him or her.  But Mona Lisa presents a perplexing, uninterpretable look.

To me--and this is just me--it is that people cannot readily read what she is trying to convey because the corners of the mouth are not symmetrical.  It confuses them because it sends out multiple signals, indicating multiple moods.  (If you take a straight-edge and place it along the axis of the nose, the left side of Mona Lisa's face looks mischievious and almost impish, while the right side looks somewhat bored.) So, she becomes confusing, and so, mysterious.

It’s probably due to Bell’s Palsy…a condition that causes a temporary weakness or paralysis of the muscles in the face.  I went to school with a girl who had it.  It can occur when the nerve that controls your facial muscles becomes inflamed, swollen, or compressed. The condition causes one side of your face to droop or become stiff.

It's ironic, because there’s probably nothing wrong with the left side of Mona Lisa's face; it’s all to do with the right side, which has the paralysis causing that side to droop.  The (affected) right side of her face appears normal, but in fact is without muscle control making the left look over-animated.  The quizzical curve in the left side is probably her normal look, and if the right matched her expression would not be so perplexing.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:I wonder what it was about Mona Lisa that has captured peoples imagination for centuries?

It’s probably due to Bell’s Palsy…a condition that causes a temporary weakness or paralysis of the muscles in the face.  I went to school with a girl who had it.  It can occur when the nerve that controls your facial muscles becomes inflamed, swollen, or compressed. The condition causes one side of your face to droop or become stiff.

well, you certainly knocked all the mystique and romance out of that masterpiece hahahahaha


don't mind me though, i'm feeling slightly disturbed over the fact that i would have totally been shagging Joseph Stalin

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

It’s probably due to Bell’s Palsy…a condition that causes a temporary weakness or paralysis of the muscles in the face.  I went to school with a girl who had it.  It can occur when the nerve that controls your facial muscles becomes inflamed, swollen, or compressed. The condition causes one side of your face to droop or become stiff.

well, you certainly knocked all the mystique and romance out of that masterpiece hahahahaha

  Ain't it the truth?  So often, romantic or heroic gestures are just a matter of being frozen in time when the moment arrives.  They say the last two men in this iconic photograph were already falling face down in the mud:



However, da Vinci deliberately and painstakenly captured that look in Mona Lisa, and it convinces me he was purposely trying to achieve it.  If he was just randomly painting the woman, he would not have tried so hard to detail the asymmetry of her face.

Historians agree that Leonardo commenced the painting of Mona Lisa in 1503, working on it for approximately four years and keeping it himself for some years after.

It is said that he carried it with him everywhere until the day he died...

Died 2 May 1519.

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:



It’s probably due to Bell’s Palsy…a condition that causes a temporary weakness or paralysis of the muscles in the face.  I went to school with a girl who had it.  It can occur when the nerve that controls your facial muscles becomes inflamed, swollen, or compressed. The condition causes one side of your face to droop or become stiff.

well, you certainly knocked all the mystique and romance out of that masterpiece hahahahaha


don't mind me though, i'm feeling slightly disturbed over the fact that i would have totally been shagging Joseph Stalin

Ha ha second the second part of your reply!

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:



It’s probably due to Bell’s Palsy…a condition that causes a temporary weakness or paralysis of the muscles in the face.  I went to school with a girl who had it.  It can occur when the nerve that controls your facial muscles becomes inflamed, swollen, or compressed. The condition causes one side of your face to droop or become stiff.

well, you certainly knocked all the mystique and romance out of that masterpiece hahahahaha


don't mind me though, i'm feeling slightly disturbed over the fact that i would have totally been shagging Joseph Stalin

Vintage wrote:

gelico wrote:

well, you certainly knocked all the mystique and romance out of that masterpiece hahahahaha

don't mind me though, i'm feeling slightly disturbed over the fact that i would have totally been shagging Joseph Stalin

Ha ha second the second part of your reply!

Princess Ileana of Romania is a babe, as well.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:I wonder what it was about Mona Lisa that has captured peoples imagination for centuries?

The corner on the left side of her mouth (our right) makes for a peculiar, unaccustomed façade or look.  (Hence, the talk about the Mona Lisa smile.)

People are used to reading facial expressions as they are listening to vocal expressions.  Even a person who is silent (as women and children were supposed to be in 16th-century Europe) conveys a reaction or response to the conversation around him or her.  But Mona Lisa presents a perplexing, uninterpretable look.

To me--and this is just me--it is that people cannot readily read what she is trying to convey because the corners of the mouth are not symmetrical.  It confuses them because it sends out multiple signals, indicating multiple moods.  (If you take a straight-edge and place it along the axis of the nose, the left side of Mona Lisa's face looks mischievious and almost impish, while the right side looks somewhat bored.) So, she becomes confusing, and so, mysterious.

It’s probably due to Bell’s Palsy…a condition that causes a temporary weakness or paralysis of the muscles in the face.  I went to school with a girl who had it.  It can occur when the nerve that controls your facial muscles becomes inflamed, swollen, or compressed. The condition causes one side of your face to droop or become stiff.

It's ironic, because there’s probably nothing wrong with the left side of Mona Lisa's face; it’s all to do with the right side, which has the paralysis causing that side to droop.  The (affected) right side of her face appears normal, but in fact is without muscle control making the left look over-animated.  The quizzical curve in the left side is probably her normal look, and if the right matched her expression would not be so perplexing.

You have certainly given this some thought Quill, and you could be right.

I was thinking she looked like she could still have a bit of puppy fat on her cheeks, but not so.
I read up a little, and according to some research, she was married off to a slave trader at the age of 15. So, when the portrait was started she was 24.....maybe the expression on her face is already a slightly sardonic world weary one, knowledgable beyond her years.

Vintage wrote:

gelico wrote:


well, you certainly knocked all the mystique and romance out of that masterpiece hahahahaha


don't mind me though, i'm feeling slightly disturbed over the fact that i would have totally been shagging Joseph Stalin

Ha ha second the second part of your reply!

lol I am still laughing Vintage

Epic by gelico

Only gelico, could find a way to look positively at a picture of one of the most vilest men in history

Didgee wrote:

Vintage wrote:
Ha ha second the second part of your reply!

lol I am still laughing Vintage

Epic by gelico

Only gelico, could find a way to look positively at a picture of one of the most vilest men in history

That is a trait we all lack

The ability to look inside each and everyone of us and still see the good in people, when they are rotten to the core

I really respect that of gelico

I cannot do that

She sees rightly that Stalin was quite the attractive young man

He was

If gelico had of dated him. He would have never rose to lead the Soviet Union

He would have wanted to stay by her side

When I say the only cure to the totalitarian nature of men, is women

Its because they are the only ones to be able to truly tame men.

Night all

Brilliant videos!

Didgee wrote:

Didgee wrote:

lol I am still laughing Vintage

Epic by gelico

Only gelico, could find a way to look positively at a picture of one of the most vilest men in history

That is a trait we all lack

The ability to look inside each and everyone of us and still see the good in people, when they are rotten to the core

I really respect that of gelico

I cannot do that

She sees rightly that Stalin was quite the attractive young man

He was

If gelico had of dated him. He would have never rose to lead the Soviet Union

He would have wanted to stay by her side

When I say the only cure to the totalitarian nature of men, is women

Its because they are the only ones to be able to truly tame men.

Night all

lol, didge that was sweet but i have to be honest wiht you, it had naff all to do with looking deeper, for me it was solely all about the fanny flutter

your thread triggered my curiosity though and i ended up watching a documentary on Stalin. Here's a point that I don't understand and perhaps you could help me with

i get that the Bolshevik uprisings and all were about class wars, ending the elitism, social justice, workers rights, more equality et al. so that being the case why would they kill off the peasants?

one of the quotes was ''the men from the cities travelled out to the countryside and knew that the peasants were being killed off, exiled or sent to camps but they saw it as a good thing, a necessary thing and a road to paradise''

why?

where did they get these beliefs from?

their ideals seem to conflict with their actions

ps i've only watched the one docu so far so maybe i'm confused, and i'm also feeling like i now need to go back and watcch something on Lenin too hahaha

i have to say you do put up the best threads

gelico wrote:

Didgee wrote:

That is a trait we all lack

The ability to look inside each and everyone of us and still see the good in people, when they are rotten to the core

I really respect that of gelico

I cannot do that

She sees rightly that Stalin was quite the attractive young man

He was

If gelico had of dated him. He would have never rose to lead the Soviet Union

He would have wanted to stay by her side

When I say the only cure to the totalitarian nature of men, is women

Its because they are the only ones to be able to truly tame men.

Night all

lol, didge that was sweet but i have to be honest wiht you, it had naff all to do with looking deeper, for me it was solely all about the fanny flutter

your thread triggered my curiosity though and i ended up watching a documentary on Stalin.  Here's a point that I don't understand and perhaps you could help me with

i get that the Bolshevik uprisings and all were about class wars, ending the elitism, social justice, workers rights, more equality et al.  so that being the case why would they kill off the peasants?

one of the quotes was  ''the men from the cities travelled out to the countryside and knew that the peasants were being killed off, exiled or sent to camps but they saw it as a good thing, a  necessary thing and a road to paradise''

why?

where did they get these beliefs from?

their ideals seem to conflict with their actions

ps i've only watched the one docu so far so maybe i'm confused, and i'm also feeling like i now need to go back and watcch something on Lenin too hahaha

i have to say you do put up the best threads

This is a point about which historians write a lot.  Riasanovsky, Nicholas V., A History of Russia (1960).  Russia suffered a European inferiority complex.  Hence, the faberge eggs, gilded palace rooms, and seasons in France for the Czar and his family.  It was all compensatory behavior.  Everyone, especially the Russians, assumed the backwardness of Russia:

Russia & Backwardness wrote:Russia like all places we might investigate as “backward” had its own historical conditions that shaped its confrontation with the IR [Industrial Revolution] in W Europe. Its own IR did not take place until the 1890s after 20 years of halting efforts.

In the years after the French Revolution, Russia established a name for itself as the most reactionary power in Europe. The tsars of the early 19th c, particularly Nicholas I, developed a police state so rigid that in 1848 when revolutionary movements spread across all the rest of Europe, Russia remained untouched.

Nicholas I’s own severe rejection of any western influences whatsoever was shaped by his experience of coming to power in the wake of a nobles’ revolt in 1825—Decembrist Revolt. Between 1848 and the Crimean War, there were more than 100 peasant revolts—however, the army was able to suppress them.

https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/97181/21h-912-spring-2003/contents/study-materials/horussia11hand.pdf

When Stalin took over, this took the expression of an assumed economic and industrial inferiority complex.  Hence, the work camps and emphasis on modernization of the Russian economy.  Lichtheim, George, A Short History of Socialism (1970).  As one commentator said:

Journal of Politics & History wrote:Since Russia's population in the early twentieth century was 80 per cent peasant, and non-Slavs constituted close to half of the population of the state that in 1923 became the Soviet Union, that meant that “backwardness” was the prevailing condition. By self-description, the Bolsheviks were a vanguard party.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8497.00103#:~:text=Since%20Russia's%20population%20in%20the,Bolsheviks%20were%20a%20vanguard%20party.

It was common for the intelligentsia to accept the belief in the backwardness of Russian culture and economy.

gelico wrote:

Didgee wrote:

That is a trait we all lack

The ability to look inside each and everyone of us and still see the good in people, when they are rotten to the core

I really respect that of gelico

I cannot do that

She sees rightly that Stalin was quite the attractive young man

He was

If gelico had of dated him. He would have never rose to lead the Soviet Union

He would have wanted to stay by her side

When I say the only cure to the totalitarian nature of men, is women

Its because they are the only ones to be able to truly tame men.

Night all

lol, didge that was sweet but i have to be honest wiht you, it had naff all to do with looking deeper, for me it was solely all about the fanny flutter

your thread triggered my curiosity though and i ended up watching a documentary on Stalin.  Here's a point that I don't understand and perhaps you could help me with

i get that the Bolshevik uprisings and all were about class wars, ending the elitism, social justice, workers rights, more equality et al.  so that being the case why would they kill off the peasants?

one of the quotes was  ''the men from the cities travelled out to the countryside and knew that the peasants were being killed off, exiled or sent to camps but they saw it as a good thing, a  necessary thing and a road to paradise''

why?

where did they get these beliefs from?

their ideals seem to conflict with their actions

ps i've only watched the one docu so far so maybe i'm confused, and i'm also feeling like i now need to go back and watcch something on Lenin too hahaha

i have to say you do put up the best threads

+1

Thanks Gelico, I love these type of threads

The artistry here is breathtaking, down to the open pores and skin blemishes, I am in awe of talent like this.
This young artist paints such realistic pictures they look like actual photos of historical figures.