What about this story of Grimaldi and his depiction with a eyes wide open veil? Grimaldi was not a painter but a secretary in the Vatican who documented that in 1616 or 1617, there were five copies of the Vatican Veronica made by Artist Pietro Strozzi. However, All five are known and there whereabouts accounted for. He mentioned nothing about eyes being open. All of the copies have their eyes closed.
The unfinished Grimaldi document is controversial because the frontispiece seems to show a representation of the Veronica that may, or may not, have its eyes open. That may have been an affectation of the artist who decorated the manuscript. At the size of the iconography of the image, it's a matter of interpretation of the observer whether the eyes or open or closed or not. The image is certainly not realism to the image itself.
Front Page of Grimaldi's Work
Frontpiece image
There is also evidence that someone played hanky-panky with the dating on the unfinished manuscript, changing Grimaldi's 1616 dates= of authorship by a few years to 1620, making them later than Grimaldi actually penned the document. However they did not change the dates on which Grimaldi says Strozzi painted his copies of the Vatican Veronica.
Four of the extant copies of the Vatican Veronica's Veil from 1617-1618
But, iconography of the 1600s was not realistic to what they were portraying in any case. Every other painting of the Veronica of the period showed it with open eyes.. . and it did not look at all like the obscure Manoppello Veronica at all.
Incidentally, in 2014 the Manoppellp Veronica image was submitted to the German Police Forensic Laboratory for computerized comparison with the Shroud of Turin image. The software is used to do feature comparison for criminal identification and is amazingly accurate in finding individuals in different photos, even in disguises. The Software reported that not only could no match be found, but the Manoppello image was not a human photo image but rather a work of human artifice, a painting, with which it could not do any comparisons. There were too many errors in anatomy to be comparable with any human face.
On the other hand, the image on the Shroud, after algorithmically removing the cloth artifacting, was recognized as human, the equivalent of a photograph, and was ready to be compared, but since the exemplar from the Manoppello Veronica was not usable, the software aborted.
"I have sent the image of the face from the Shroud and the image of Manoppello to Mr. Kinn, a criminal inspector and expert at LKA Mainz/Germany (German State Police). I had asked him about the possibility of using biometry to compare the Shroud face and the Manoppello face. In the case of the Manoppello he said that the computer would throw this out as a painting. In the case of the Turin face the computer would recognize it as a real face, if the pattern of the cloth were removed by algorithmical mathematics. Then the face recognition software would be able to make a biometrical scan. With the face of Manopello it is not possible, because the software would identify this not as a photo of a face but as an artwork. And there are too many anatomical mistakes on the face of Manoppello, whereas the Shroud of Turin face is anatomically correct. With your research into the Shroud of Turin, could you also bring light to the Manoppello image? This would be a great help."