Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 1992730" data-attributes="member: 177">The biggest I can think of being that this process would not produce what looks like a normal photo-negative image.  You are correct that the shroud looks akin to a photo negative image.  But any time you wrap the shroud around something (flesh, bronze, whatever) to produce the image, you get the same distortion of the face I mentioend before.  So, in order to get what looks like an undistorted photo negative, you'd have to have a very cleverly made statue, distorded so as to produce a normal looking image after the folding.  And that's getting into the level of absurdity.Note that the fact that the shroud doesn't have paint on it does not mean that whatever was used to create the image was not painted on.  One can imagine, for example, a dye or oxidant could have been painted onto the cloth to produce the image.  And an oxidant has, chemically, roughly the same effect as burning by hot bronze.One of the leading contenders as the artist in question is Mr. Leonardo Da Vinci himself.  I think we're likely to lose if we place bets upon what he woule "never" have done.  That's part of genius.And, any time you bring up Leonardo Da Vinci, you bring up some lovely plot ideas <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification