1K Gallery

Overview

Fauvist Mona Lisa is the inaugural collection by 1K Gallery. The series presents 1,000 digital reinterpretations of Leonardo da Vinci's masterpiece through a visual language inspired by Fauvism and Henri Matisse: intense colours, expressive contrasts, simplified forms, and broad chromatic planes.

Each NFT features a unique combination of environment, long-sleeve shirt, short-sleeve tunic, mantle, and necklace. The collection was built through the deterministic composition of artistic layers created, refined, and approved in advance. The final works were not produced as random prompt variations: each image results from a controlled combination of the collection's official traits.

Core specifications

Creation and curation process

1. The artistic layers for each trait category were created and approved.
2. The system calculated all 24,010 mathematically possible combinations.
3. Chromatic compatibility rules eliminated 12,530 combinations in which identical or excessively similar clothing colours weakened the visual reading.
4. Exactly 1,000 combinations were selected from the 11,480 chromatically valid options while preserving the approved frequency of every variant.
5. All combinations underwent automated validation and visual review.
6. Approved images were recomposed from the master files at their native 2,000 × 2,000-pixel resolution.
7. Final files were checked for quantity, dimensions, sequence, metadata correspondence, and cryptographic uniqueness.

Trait distribution

The percentages below represent the exact frequency of each trait within the 1,000-NFT supply.

T1 — Background

T2 — Long-Sleeve Shirt

T3 — Short-Sleeve Tunic

T4 — Mantle

T5 — Necklace

Missing traits in the metadata

In the public metadata, the 400 items without a necklace carry an empty Necklace field. This technically represents the absence of the trait, instead of artificially creating a “None” attribute that would read as a value in its own right.

The choice has a consequence for rarity, and it is the one that shapes the whole collection: the absence of a necklace is the most frequent value in its category, present in 40% of the supply, and therefore contributes least to any rarity score. Those 400 items are the least distinguished on that axis — and, as the next section shows, they are not evenly spread across the numbering.

How rarity is calculated

The collection does not include a Rarity Tier trait and does not pre-classify NFTs as Common, Rare, or Legendary. Rarity is a mathematical consequence of trait frequencies and the specific combination present in each NFT.

The score used throughout this sheet is the sum, across the five categories, of the inverse frequency of the value each item carries:

Where count is the number of items in the whole collection carrying that same value — the figures in the distribution tables above. A value present in 45 items contributes 22.22 to the score; one present in 400 contributes 2.50. The rarer the value, the more it adds. Ranks run from 1, the rarest item in the collection, to 1,000, the most common.

A less frequent trait may contribute to an artwork's rarity, but overall rarity depends on the complete set of attributes. Marketplaces and independent tools can therefore calculate rankings from the actual metadata, without a promotional category inserted by the collection and without trusting this document.

Rarity across Token IDs — open disclosure

In this collection the artwork-to-token assignment was not shuffled: numbering follows the order of generation. This produced a measurable effect on how rarity is distributed across token IDs, and the gallery would rather disclose it than let third parties discover it.

Measured distribution by ID range

Using the score defined above, where position 1 is the rarest and 1,000 the most common:

The cause

It is the distribution of the items with no necklace. The absence of a necklace is the most frequent value in the Necklace category, present in 40% of the collection, and therefore contributes least to rarity. Those 400 items cluster towards the end of the numbering: 132 of them fall between IDs 801 and 1000, against 58 between IDs 1 and 200. The last column of the table above is the mechanism, sitting next to its effect.

How the gradient behaves

It is not uniform. Between IDs 1 and 600 the average position hovers around 430 with no clear trend — the 101–200 range is in fact the strongest average in the collection, ahead of the very first block. The slope appears only from ID 601 onward and steepens through the final block.

And it does not decide individual items. The rarest artworks are scattered: of the ten rarest in the collection, only two fall between IDs 1 and 100. A low token number is not a rare artwork, and a high one is not a common artwork — the effect is visible in averages over hundreds of items and says little about any single token.

What changed for the next collections

From the second 1K Gallery collection onward, the artwork-to-token assignment is shuffled before metadata generation, with the seed recorded in the provenance file. The gradient described above is specific to this inaugural collection and does not recur.

Items reserved for the gallery

100 items. They are minted in the presale stage, before the public opening, and therefore correspond to tokens #1 through #100.

That range has an average position of 416, against 500 for the collection as a whole. Because this collection's numbering is not shuffled, the gallery's block is measurably — if modestly — rarer than the average. The gallery states this explicitly rather than leaving it to be found.

File integrity and provenance

Each of the 1,000 images has a unique trait combination and a distinct SHA-256 hash. The commitments below document the version prepared before publication without revealing the individual manifest or the association between images and Token IDs.

No allocation seed is published for this collection, because none exists: the artwork-to-token assignment was not shuffled. That is the subject of the previous section, and the reason the practice changed from the second collection onward.

The permanent CIDs for the images and metadata are published in the section below and written on-chain. The complete individual image-hash manifest will be disclosed only after the reveal.

Images and metadata

Image optimisation

• All images are 2,000 × 2,000 pixels with a square composition.
• The upload version uses palette-optimised PNG files, which preserve the collection's flat-colour language exactly while reducing transfer size. A palette suits this artwork because it is built from broad areas of uniform colour, where a lossy format would show banding at the edges between planes.
• Each optimised PNG is approximately 1.0 to 1.34 MB.
• RGB master files were preserved separately for archiving and conservation. The palette version is a delivery format, not the original.

Metadata

• The metadata contains 1,000 records encoded in UTF-8, one for each NFT.
• The metadata uses five public categories: Background, Long-Sleeve Shirt, Short-Sleeve Tunic, Mantle, and Necklace.
• The Necklace field is empty on the 400 items that carry no necklace.

Filename correspondence

• The sequence 1.png through 1000.png corresponds directly to Fauvist Mona Lisa #1 through Fauvist Mona Lisa #1000.
• The token number matches the numeric part of the filename, with no offset and no zero padding.
• The base URI is written with a trailing slash, because the contract concatenates the token number onto it.

Contract, storage and license

Data verified directly from the contract and from permanent storage, published before the first mint. Every value below can be independently checked by anyone.