Turin Shroud was faked 'photographically'

[CSBC]

AP News

[Hotblack]

Thanks Chris. I'm glad you posted that. I was wondering what they might come up with. You've just saved me having to sit through the hour of the tedious, repetitive waffle that is the modern documentary.

Interesting conclusion though.

[Cuthbert]

The Leonardo da Vinci connection has been postulated for years...

'The Turin Shroud: In Whose Image?' (2000 version, updated from the 1994 edition)

Does the documentary add anything new to the story?

[Fen]

Does the documentary add anything new to the story?

Doubt it. It is Channel five after all

[Terrywoodenpic]

Does that make it more or less valuable to the art world...
It might be a fake Jesus but a real leonardo.

[Still_Togging_Along]

I have thought for years (because of the accurate perspective present in paintings around the mid/late 15th century) that the camera obscura has been around a lot longer than previously thought. The artisans of this time had 'Guilds' which undoubtably would have ensured that the camera obscura remained a secret 'craft' for as long as possible.

If whoever produced this, had applied a 'chemical' to the body, which was then wrapped up in fabric which then absorbed this, I'm sure something like this would be the result. Leonardo certainly used to dissect bodies, but unlike others, didn't get hassled by the Church, so maybe he received a secret commission to produce a 'religious relic' .... something that the Church has a long-standing reputation of being involved in and I would guess one of his wealthy patrons (eg the Medicis) might well have funded such a project.

Would the AP be willing to set up a project/challenge to get people to find ways of 'imprinting' a shape onto the type of fabrics used at this time?

As long as the 'subject' used isn't Big Will or AW .....

[Nigel_Atherton]

You mean that isn't really Jesus? Surely not! Next they'll be telling us that Jesus had kids...

[Roger_Provins]

The photos I've seen of the shroud show the likeness of a human face when the shroud is stretched out flat. If the shroud had been wrapped closely around a body and face any imprint left on the shroud would, when the shroud is removed and flattened out, appear much too wide and very distorted.

Any theory which does allow for this elementary fact must be wrong.

[Fen]

Any theory which does allow for this elementary fact must be wrong.

Since when has fact ever had anything to do with religion

[SqueamishOssifrage]

Personally, I subscribe to the Knight/Lomas theory, that it was the shroud of Jaques de Molay, after his crucifixion, confession, and release. The dates, locations, and people involved are a much better fit than any alternative theory.

[Roger_Provins]

Any theory which does allow for this elementary fact must be wrong.

Since when has fact ever had anything to do with religion

Quite, but I was also meaning any theory - such as the one above. ^^^

[SqueamishOssifrage]

Maybe, but as Jaques de Molay was not dead at the time, it would not be wrapped around him, but just laid on top. The two authors I refer to wrote several thousand words on the matter, and it was clearly well researched. Incidentally, since the publication of the Knight/Lomas book, further details have been published from the Vatican archives, which lend some support to the story of the initial trial, subsequent trial, and execution of J de M.

[dangie]

I've got a potato in the cupboard with what looks like a face on it.