Abstract: This study proposes a novel computational approach to address the centuries-old debate surrounding the authenticity of the two principal portraits of William Shakespeare: the Chandos portrait (National Portrait Gallery, UK) and the Sanders portrait (brought from London to Montreal in 1919). The biometric facial recognition analysis reveals a statistically significant correlation in craniofacial architecture, suggesting that the two paintings depict the same individual at different stages of life. And while traditional art history has often treated those paintings as distinct works due to stylistic differences and surface degradation, this research employs AI-based image restoration to enhance and normalize both paintings. By removing layers of oxidized varnish and historical overpainting, a high-resolution structural baseline is established leaving no doubt that those paintings are authentic representations of Shakespeare. This work provides a technological bridge between the fully scientifically analyzed Sanders portrait and the cultural tradition of the Chandos portrait.
Bridging the Iconographic Gap: Biometric Comparison and AIAssisted Restoration of the Chandos and Sanders Portraits of William Shakespeare (Keywords : Shakespeare, face scars. Chandos and Sanders portraits, visual face recognition, MyHeritage AI photo enhancer and deep learning technology, genuine paintings) Dedicated to the memories of Lloyd Sullivan and Robert J. Schmitt Jr. Introduction This short study aims to compare two of the most significant visual representations of William Shakespeare (WS): the Chandos portrait (1-2), (done around 1610) widely regarded as the most iconic likeness, and the Sanders portrait (3) (1603), one of the most extensively studied candidates for an authentic life portrait. According to George Vertue (2), the Chandos painting was executed around 1610 by WS’s friend John Taylor, who later left it in his will to William Davenant. Davenant was WS’s godson and was also rumored to have been his illegitimate son. The portrait eventually came into the possession of the Duke of Chandos, from whom it derives its name, and it later became the first portrait acquired by the National Portrait Gallery when the gallery was founded in the 19th century. The Sanders portrait was owned for generations by the Sanders family, who claimed that it had been passed down since the 17th century. The portrait was painted in 1603 by an ancestor, John or William Sanders, a friend of WS and a minor actor in his theatrical company. The existence of the portrait became public only in 2001, when Lloyd Sullivan, who had inherited the painting from his mother, Kathleen Hales Sanders, in 1972, revealed it publicly. The Sanders portrait of WS has successfully undergone virtually every scientific test to which a painting can be subjected. Thanks to Karel van Mander’s realism (4) in his painting "The chess players" showing Ben Jonson and WS, major facial scars so well painted were found important facial landmarks supporting the identity of WS’s portraits. On that matter, this study first compares our two paintings of interest with a visual face recognition software (VFR) developed by the late Robert Schmitt Jr., a pioneer in this field.
1 The initial comparisons of the Chandos and Sanders portraits using the VFR tool
Fig. 1, Side-by-side facial comparisons between the Chandos and Sanders portraits.
Fig. 2, Overlay of the Chandos and the Sanders portraits using the VFR tool.
1.1 Results In the top panel, the two sitters are aligned with their eyes on the same horizontal plane and with identical interpupillary distance. In the second panel, the sliding comparison pauses at the level of the right eye; in the third, at the nose; and in the fourth, at the left eye, highlighting scars above the left eyebrow. The comparison reveals striking correspondences: 1) a similar baldness pattern; 2) similar thin eyebrow shape; 3) similar space between the eyebrows; 4) large forehead; 5) same hairstyle; 6) similar eyelids and dark rings under and above the eyes; 7) similar right facial
contour line up to the right eyebrow; 8) similar nose shape and nostrils; 9) similar cupid bow upper lip shape; and 10) similar clearly visible scars above the left eye. The sitter in the Chandos portrait appears older, as indicated by more pronounced baldness, elongation of the philtrum (the distance between nose and upper lip), and a slight sagging of the lower face. These features account for the higher positioning of the smiling mouth in the Sanders portrait relative to the Chandos image. Another notable difference lies in the right side of the forehead, which appears broader in the Sanders portrait—consistent with the Droeshout engraving (not shown here). The overlay image further demonstrates compelling alignment: the left earlobe, the continuity of both eyebrows, and the overall facial contours correspond with remarkable precision. 1.2 Conclusion Taken together, these VFR results strongly suggest that both portraits depict the same individual. To extend this analysis, the images were subsequently enhanced using AI-based restoration technology from MyHeritage Deep Nostalgia, which improves resolution and sharpness (Fig. 3-4).
2 AI technology from MyHeritage.com (6) 2.1 MyHeritage Photo Enhancer This tool specifically targets blurry or low-resolution faces. It uses a "super-resolution" model to increase the resolution of faces in a photo. In fact 4 times more pixels are added to the original photo.
It analyzes the blurred face, compares it to its training data, and reconstructs the facial features (eyes, nose, mouth) in high detail, often making them much clearer than the original image. 3.2 Deep Nostalgia Deep Nostalgia which includes the photo enhancer feature lets you animate the face(s) in a photo using deep learning technology. It requires a high resolution face as input to apply the animation. 3.3 Comparisons of the Chandos and Sanders portraits with MyHeritage Deep Nostagia And the following part of this study involves screen captures (Fig. 7) of animated pictures of the sitters in the Chandos and Sanders portraits (video not shown).
Fig. 3, Selected screen captures of the Deep Nostalgia animated video for the Chandos (left) and the Sanders (right) portraits. The left side of each screen capture shown in Fig. 7 where most (but not all) of the skin imperfections were located are shown in Fig. 8 and then further analysed.
A
B
Fig. 4, AI-enhanced images of the left side of the sitters’ faces: (A) Chandos portrait and (B) Sanders portrait. Insets show the original, untreated artworks. Red dots indicate prominent swellings or scars extending from below the left eye toward the corner of the mouth; green dots mark an additional feature beneath the left corner of the mouth; red dots above the mustache identify three circular marks; and blue dot highlight a protuberance on the eyelid.
3.4 Results Following enhancement (Fig.3-4), additional correspondences become evident. In both portraits, one can clearly observe swellings or scars extending from below the left eye to the corner of the mouth, as well as a secondary feature beneath the left corner of the mouth. The heavier beard in the Chandos portrait partially obscures these features, which are more visible in the Sanders portrait. The three circular marks above the mustache correspond to previously noted observations in the Chandos portrait (7) and have also been identified in the Stratford bust (8). Additionally, a distinct eyelid protuberance is visible in both images. With the exception of this eyelid feature, the Chandos sitter exhibits less pronounced scarring, consistent with an older subject (around 1610) compared to the younger sitter in the Sanders portrait (1603). This difference is plausibly explained by the partial healing of facial injuries over time. 3.5 Conclusion Importantly, the AI enhancement process does not remove these features, supporting the conclusion that they are not the results of hazard, artefacts of degradation or restoration but intentional elements captured by the artists. And when considered alongside the shared structural features identified through VFR—such as forehead pattern, eyebrow alignment, mouth structure, and the distinctive scars above the left eye—these findings are leaving no doubt that those paintings are authentic representations of The Bard. YES, the Chandos painting of WS is genuine just like the Sanders painting. As mentioned previously, the Chandos portrait was painted by John Taylor, an actor who performed in WS’s company and is believed to have known him personally. Similarly, John (or William) Sanders, attributed with the Sanders portrait, is also thought to have had direct access to the playwright. It is therefore plausible that Taylor and Sanders were acquainted, and that Taylor may have used the Sanders portrait as a reference. Given the remarkable correspondence between the two portraits, one may legitimately question whether WS sat directly for the Chandos painting at all. The Sanders portrait may capture WS in his prime, while the Chandos portrait reflects a later stage of life, preserving the same enduring facial features—including scars—that define both images. Finally, an art critic wrote that he would never believe that the sitter shown in the Sanders painting done in 1603 might become the sitter painted in the Chandos painting done around 1610. But it was forgetting that during WS time (outbreaks of diseases, limited medical knowledge, lack of sanitation, etc) 'the span of life on the average was shorter then and the ravages of years much quicker in consequence' (Sharp Ogden ref. 9). Jean-Pierre Doucet The author is a retired scientist living in Gatineau QC Canada and acknowledges the use of an AI language model (ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI) for assistance with editing and stylistic refinement. All interpretations and conclusions are the author’s own. The author also would like to thank the people of Myheritage.com for the use of their powerful tool as well Daniel Fischlin for his help and patience during a nearly 14 years journey with the Sanders portrait.
Addenda The following figure is an exemple showing two sitters that are not at all related when compared with the VFR tool:
Overlay of the Sanders and a Ben Jonson paintings. The picture speaks for itself.
MAIN REFERENCES: 1. Joseph Parker Norris. (1885) The portraits of Shakespeare, Robert M. Lidsay, Philadelphia, 266 pages. 2. Hildegard Hammerschmidt-Hummel. (2006) The True Face of William Shakespeare, The poet's death mask and likenesses from three periods of his life, Chaucer Press, 2008 pages. 3. Stéphanie Nolen. (2007) Shakespeare's Face: Unraveling the Legend and History of Shakespeare's Mysterious Portrait, Free Press, 384 pages. 4. Jean-Pierre Doucet. THE SHAKESPEARE IN VAN MANDER’S PAINTING "THE CHESS PLAYERS" IS TRULY THE SAME AS IN THESANDERS’ PAINTING OF SHAKESPEARE, https://free.relayto.com/jeanpierre-doucet/the-shakespeare-in-van-mander-s-painting-thechess-players-is-the-same-as-in-the-sanders-painting-qrx3il9e2a6d6/WS2CXFih1 5. David Shakespeare. 2021, Is this the face of Shakespeare? https://deveresociety.co.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2015/12/Is-this-the-face-of-Shakespeare-.pdf. 6. Masha Novak, https://education.myheritage.com/webinar/a-deep-dive-into-deep-nostalgia/ 7. Simon Andrew Stirling.The Faces of Shakespeare: Revealing Shakespeare's Life and Death Through Portraits and Other Objects,https://www.gold.ac.uk/glits-e/back-issues/thefaces-of-shakespeare-revealing-shakespeares-/ 8. Jean-Pierre Doucet. THE MISSING LINK BETWEEN THE STRATFORD BUST AND SOME GENUINE PAINTIINGS OF SHAKESPEARE, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsx9aneJYBs 9. William Sharp Ogden. 1912, SHAKSPERE’S PORTRAITURE: PAINTED, GRAVEN, AND MEDALLIC, The British Numismatic Journal, Vol. VII 1910.1, Bernard Quaritch editor, London, 58 pages.