I don’t know what this patterning style is called. Paisley?
I don’t know whether the faces I found were intentional. Maybe?
In both collages, I’ve put the setting on the left and the close-up of the face on the right.
I don’t know what this patterning style is called. Paisley?
I don’t know whether the faces I found were intentional. Maybe?
In both collages, I’ve put the setting on the left and the close-up of the face on the right.
They’re watching you! Everywhere!
Tom
Tom – IKR? How rude! 🙂
I counted eight potential faces, human or animal, in the upper left shot before I felt my sanity slipping. I begin to feel like a version of the line in a Melanie song, “A thing’s a phallic symbol if it’s longer than it’s short.” If I can find figures that could conceivably represent eyes, with or without brows, then any other feature in the vicinity will obligingly pretend to be nasal or oral, whether minimal or ridiculously floral. I wonder whether this tendency of the brain to accept representations of faces plays a part in hallucination, where the slowness of cerebral integration and of eye focus makes the person believe two (human) forms are visible simultaneously, rather than the one actually present?
Laurna – Yes, the eyes are key, and probably what my subconscious keys on. I can’t remember when babies start accepting a known face as a face if it’s presented upside down, but it seems to take a while.