It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Shroud of Turin negative photo

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 01:57 AM
I came across this site which will be linked below. I was amazed at when a negative from a phot taken from the shroud is shown it shows a picture of the face of Jesus very carefully. If we go back all these years to when the shroud appeared as it says in this site. "If the shroud is a fake" then who had the technology to "Burn" such an image onto a flax shroud.

They didnt have cameras back then and or camera film so how the hell did these people know what they were making as the face is only very clearly seen in a negative film of the shroud. Surely this makes some proof that the shroud is not a fake. Im very interseted in this so your view would be gratefully accepted

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 04:22 AM
I remember seeing a BBC documentary not long ago about the shroud. The scientists in the program considered that it was made at some point during the rennaisance (I've read somewhere else that some consider it to be a "photograph" of Leonardo da Vinvi, always that bloody da Vinci hmmmmm).

However, apparently making a type of photosensitive paint would not be beyond the skills of even a mediocre alchemist. Paint up the material in a dark room with that pinhole camera thing that was popular at the time to make portrait painting easier, get someone to stand still for a long time on the other side of the pinhole (Very still indeed, hence the notion that the figure on the shroud could have been a hanged man) and after a while...... Voila..... Turin Shroud'tastic.

Unfortunately no more research can be done since no one will let the scientists get a sample, and they need a sample from an area that would've had the paint on i.e. where the figure is, so, no chance of that then!

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 06:27 AM
yeah I'd say that proves it. Mystery solved. if only we could figure out the final answer to everything.

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 08:51 AM

They didnt have cameras back then and or camera film

Yes they did. In the time of DaVinci. I cant recall the name used for it. It was
a basic "Box Camera" . The type made in photo 101 from an oatmeal box.

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 09:48 AM
And if the above is not enough:

Anomalies resulting from projection of three images:

• A giant figure – 6'8" at front, 6'10" at back!
• Head too small for body – and displaced upwards!
(Projection of head added separately)
• Face unnaturally thin; forehead and sides of face foreshortened, ears lost
• Right arm/hand too long (double exposure of fingers)
• Light circle on nose (effect of lens, centered on the face)
• Back of head wider than front of head
• Image area oxidized and dehydrated (result of using heat to burn chemical image into cloth. Chemical solution then washed off)
Other anomalies:
• Hair hanging vertically, added later (on a shrouded, horizontal body hair would have fallen towards back of head)
• Composed expression – odd for a torture victim!
• No loin cloth but naked, with hands over genitals (sensitive to intended audience – or a cryptic joke?
•Carbon dating in 1988 at three different laboratories all agreed: the cloth was no older than the 14th century.

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 09:52 AM

Originally posted by surrender_dorothy
yeah I'd say that proves it. Mystery solved. if only we could figure out the final answer to everything.

As demonstrated in " Hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy, the final answer to everything is 42.

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 11:46 AM
So deos that mean as they had "Box Cameras" in the 14th century they would have had negatives too as that revealing picture of the shroud is only visible in negative form. Surely then the creators of the shroud must have had knowledge of what would have shown up on negative film in order to accomplish the detail

posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 08:39 AM
the shroud may well have been one of DaVincis unfinished experiments.
For which he is famous.

new topics

top topics


log in