Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

[Shroud of Turin] Comments About the Recent Experiment of Professor Luigi Garlaschelli
Shroud.com Comments About the Recent Experiment of Professor Luigi Garlaschelli PDF ^ | 11/3/2009 | Thibault Heimburger, MD

Posted on 11/03/2009 7:18:11 PM PST by Swordmaker

Recently, a new hypothesis about the origin of the image seen on the Turin Shroud has been presented by Prof. Luigi Garlaschelli1 during a press release. The results of the experiments based on this hypothesis were shown and the explanations and photographs are available on the author web site2.

Starting from these data and some complementary explanations kindly furnished to me by Prof. Garlaschelli, it is now possible to begin to examine the plausibility of this hypothesis.

The hypothesis of Prof. Luigi Garlaschelli (L.G. in the rest of the text) can be briefly but accurately summarized.

A medieval artist originally used powdered ochre and applied it on a linen sheet laid over a body using a simple frottage technique. Only the most prominent features (elbows, hands, knees, upper parts of the legs and arms) were rubbed in such a way, otherwise large distortions would have been observed (experimental observation). Therefore the sheet was removed from the body and the image free-hand completed on the flat cloth. For the face, a bas-relief must be used. This is the original Shroud image as it was made and probably seen in the first decades or centuries. As red ochre is an earth pigment, it is “safe to assume that it should contain at least traces of non neutral compounds ...like humic acids, salts or organic impurities” (personal communication). Such impurities will cause with time a discoloration of the fibers. This discoloration results from the degradation (chemical etching) of the cellulose of the linen fibers. Meanwhile, the pigments particles which were not bound to the fibers fall down so that the image, as it is seen today, is almost only due to the discoloration described above.

EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS

It is important to understand that 2 different experiments were carried out.

In the first experiment, the dry powdered pigment (“red ochre only”) was rubbed on the sheet as described above. The result is shown in Fig. 1a and 1b3. As explained, for L.G., this is probably the kind of image originally seen on the Shroud. LG tried to find solid acids or salts to be mixed with the pigment to mimic the impurities assumed to be present in the original medieval red ochre. He failed and found that “solid acids or salts without water do not leave any trace in the following artificial ageing process” (personal communication).

Therefore, he tried another method (second experiment) with 1.2% of sulfuric acid in water mixed with a blue pigment (cobalt blue). He got a semi-fluid “paste” that he applied on the sheet in the same way. Then the colored sheet was artificially heated (3 hours, 140°C.) to mimic ageing and washed to remove the blue pigment. The lack of blue color after heating and washing shows that the resulting image is only due to the action of the diluted acid. The resulting image is shown in Fig.8 and 10.

LG concluded: “We have also shown that pigments containing traces of acidic compounds can be artificially aged after the rubbing step (by heating the cloth in an oven) in such a way that, when the pigment is washed away, an image is obtained having the expected characteristics as the Shroud of Turin. In particular, the image is a pseudo-negative, is fuzzy with half-tones, resides on the topmost fibers of the cloth, has some 3D embedded properties and does not fluoresce”.

COMMENTS:

It is important to recognize that, for the first time, an impressive entire Shroud-like image has been produced. However it is very difficult to comment and discuss the conclusions of the author. Why? Because, if we try to truly understand the Shroud image, according to his image formation process hypothesis there should be some kind of mixture of his two different experiments. The first experiment (“red ochre only”) is supposed to show the spatial distribution of the color on the Shroud (after the removal of the dry pigment), while the second experiment is supposed to show the color and some physical characteristics (reflectance, lack of fluorescence) of the image resulting from the degradation of the cellulose by the non neutral impurities associated with the dry ochre pigment.

Why does L.G. think that the medieval forger used a dry powdered pigment and not a paint in its usual sense (pigment in a binder or alternatively in water)? Because he found that it is much easier to obtain a Shroud-like image than with a fluid mixture: “this would explain why the image is so fuzzy, with half-tones and different from a purely contact imprint” (personal communication). L.G. recognizes that it is a “drawback” of the method. “Rubbing slurry will not produce the same fuzzy results as rubbing a powder. If you compare the “ochre-only” image from my webpage and the “final reproduction” (done with acidic slurry), the differences are obvious”.

I think that this interesting observation is much more than a simple “drawback” of the method.

Looking at the ochre-only image, it is true that the borders are more or less fuzzy (see for example the thighs after enlarging the photography). The image at large scale has well-defined borders but it is possible that the white color of the background contributes to this impression.

However, it is very doubtful that the Shroud image could be obtained with this method using a dry pigment for the following reasons:

To illustrate what I mean, I show bellow some examples:



TOPICS: Arts/Photography; Religion; Science
KEYWORDS: shroudofturin
Here are the links to the original reports by Professor Luigi Garlaschelli:

http://sites.google.com/site/luigigarlaschelli/

http://sites.google.com/site/luigigarlaschelli/shroudreproduction"

Note that some of these articles require Microsoft Word and are in italian.

Here are some of the images referred to in the article above:


1 posted on 11/03/2009 7:18:12 PM PST by Swordmaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; albee; AnalogReigns; AnAmericanMother; Angelas; AniGrrl; annalex; annyokie; ...
A critical article on last months supposed proof that the Shroud of Turin is a forgery made in the medieval period with medieval materials. PING!

If you want on or off the Shroud of Turin Ping List, Freepmail me.


2 posted on 11/03/2009 7:20:05 PM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker
PRESENT!


3 posted on 11/03/2009 7:31:51 PM PST by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker
Why in the world would a medieval artist go to all the trouble of making a fake cloth that would stand up to futuristic testing, many, many years later? Nobody would have anything to compare it to to make it realistic as there wasn't anything like it, a photo, at that time.

If he wanted a cloth that people would venerate at that time that could be exploited for money and power all he had to do was make a carefully done thin painting on a cloth that either was old or he made to look old and he would have easily gotten away with it.

The forgery is positively rudimentary compared to the real Shroud of Turin.

4 posted on 11/03/2009 7:56:19 PM PST by Bellflower (If you are left DO NOT take the mark of the beast and be damned forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Bump


5 posted on 11/03/2009 7:56:25 PM PST by Bob Eimiller (appeasement "it's the idea that if you feed the alligator he will eat you last." Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bellflower

Agreed - so much more subtlety in the Shroud - true shroud of Christ or not; it’s far better done.


6 posted on 11/03/2009 8:01:58 PM PST by heartwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker
Which came first, the Shroud or the Veronica Veil?

I thought that when the computer images are compared their is a degree of details that could not be done "by hand".

Luigi is dancing in the dark!

7 posted on 11/03/2009 8:30:30 PM PST by Young Werther ("Quae Cum Ita Sunt - Julius Caesar "Since these things are so!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther
Which came first, the Shroud or the Veronica Veil?

Which Veronica veil? There are at least three. One held in the vatican is Linen and has no image worth calling an image:

Or another kept in Manoppello Italy the has the image of a man with a wispy beard... which is actually a self-portrait done by Raphael which has clearly visible paint pigments on it, particularly on the eyes and teeth. Raphael painted his self portrait on either Byssus, the rarest cloth on earth made from the fibers of a sea-urchin, or Cambric, a very fine French cotton used for veils, and sent it to Albrecht Dürer in response to a similar self-portrait Dürer sent to him.

If we go just by the legend of the Veronica, then the Veil predates that Shroud by at least a few hours, having supposedly been created on the Via Dolorosa just before the crucifixion and the Shroud being created a day or so after the crucifixion.

I thought that when the computer images are compared their is a degree of details that could not be done "by hand".

The only comparison done of two cloths by computer that showed such a degree of equivalence are the Shroud and the Sudarium of Oviedo, the sweat cloth that is supposed to have covered Jesus' face in death, where the blood stains share over 70 points of congruity. The Sudarium has a provenance that goes back to the fifth Century while the Shroud known provenance extends only back to the 14th.

8 posted on 11/03/2009 9:25:20 PM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther
Which came first, the Shroud or the Veronica Veil?

Another Veronica candidate is the Holy Face of Genoa:


9 posted on 11/03/2009 9:28:59 PM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

These people are so pathetic.

What contortions they go through - idiotic.


10 posted on 11/03/2009 9:58:34 PM PST by maine-iac7 ("He has the right to criticize who has the heart to help" Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker; 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; ...

.


11 posted on 11/04/2009 10:26:05 AM PST by Coleus (Abortion, Euthanasia & FOCA - - don't Obama and the Democrats just kill ya!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker
I hope, at some point, that the Bishop of Turin, along with the Vatican, will allow samples to be taken from closer to the center of the Shroud, so that Carbon dating can be done on them. It is well known that there were repairs done on the Shroud during the Middle Ages, which likely accounts for the time frame given for the samples on which the dating was done several years ago.

If those samples are dated to the first century A.D. it would render moot all this other speculation.

12 posted on 11/04/2009 1:59:53 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

They’ve been arguing about the shroud since about 1300 AD. The church has never said yes or no, and a lot of bishops thought it was a fake.

It’s probably a fake...all the scientific stuff is interesting, but the clincher for me was that the textile studies showed a weave more common in medieval Europe than in Palestine of the first century.


13 posted on 11/04/2009 6:01:45 PM PST by LadyDoc (liberals only love politically correct poor people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Thanks for the ping!


14 posted on 11/04/2009 9:04:36 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LadyDoc
It’s probably a fake...all the scientific stuff is interesting, but the clincher for me was that the textile studies showed a weave more common in medieval Europe than in Palestine of the first century.

Actually, that is not the case. The Shroud was woven on a Wall Loom that was seldom used in medieval Europe. In addition the soapwort retting and hank bleaching techniques are not at all what was used in Medieval Europe and are what was used in the 1st century Palestine area. Other three over one weave patterns have been found at Masada.

15 posted on 11/05/2009 1:02:40 AM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

I stand corrected.

thanks


16 posted on 11/05/2009 3:06:54 AM PST by LadyDoc (liberals only love politically correct poor people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson