Replies

They then tired to figure out how the image might have been created. The washcloth over the face didn't do it. A single point of light (like a flash photography) didn't do it. It turned out that a regular copier machine scanner with a flat edge of light taken of a 3D image would create the image shown on the shroud.

There never was a "washcloth over the face". It was a sudarium, a "sweat cloth", about the face, which better translates as around the face. Jewish burial customs required that the jaw be bound closed with a rope, twine, or rolled cloth to keep the mouth shut in death. This would be tied under the jaw, around the face, behind the ears, and over the crown of the head where it would be tied.

The Sudarium of Oviedo, the cloth thought to have covered Jesus head on the Cross, and while he was being carried to the Tomb, now kept in the Cathedral in Oviedo, Spain, shows signs of being rolled diagonally into a kerchief like rope, just ideal to make such a face tie to go around the face to bind the jaw closed. It would have been handy for Joseph of Arimathea and the other men involved in the quick burial to have pressed into service as one of the bindings along with the wrist and ankle bindings to keep the body from flopping akimbo.

The claim of it being "out of proportion" has also been disproved. Some of that comes from the elongated fingers. . . but those are artifacts of the x-ray nature of the image because it shows the carpal bones of the hands which the people seeing them mistake for too long fingers. Another is the claim the head is too big for the body size. Bent legs, held in place by rigor mortis shorten the leg length and also cause a distorted idea of disproportion. When all of these things are adjusted in a computer reconstruction, the image is not at all disproportionate. All of these are based on the presumption of 2D projection. . . and do not account for the facts. Your scanner point of view is more correctly explaining the differences seen.