I'd be interested to see a reproduction of the Shroud 'burn' image using even modern technology. Could it actually be reproduced?
It cannot, despite the best efforts of the debunkers.
It’s been tried multiple times and every attempt has failed in fundamental ways. It has to meet many criteria to qualify as “reproducing” the Shroud of Turin to meet scientific standards. First there must be no pigments. Most fail that way. Secondly, it can not be a char, because we know the image on the Shroud is not a char, it wasn’t burned into the Shroud. Chars fluoresce under ultraviolet light waves. The image on the Shroud does not fluoresce, while the charred areas from the 1532 fire does. Thirdly, it cannot be a photograph with any trace of a fixative chemical to hold the image, because there are no fixative chemicals on the Shroud holding the image areas. Any thing that duplicates the Shroud has to be undetectable down to the Electron-microspectroscopic level for such things as pigments, photographic fixative, etc. We are talking down to individual molecules and even atoms here.
What a LOT of these skeptics don’t seem to know, because they just ignore the state of modern Shroud science is that we KNOW what the image is made of . . . It’s made of what, for some reason we have no clue about how it happens, are slightly older aged Linen fibers that appear to be more aged than those around them and that appearance is only on the surface of those fibers, that appearance only goes an almost infinitesimal depth into the fiber’s surface. . . That part of the surface only in the soap bubble thin coating of the Soapwort fullering that was used when the Linen was soaked BEFORE it was ever spun into a thread, hank bleached, and then woven into a cloth. The image ONLY appears in that 100 Ångstrom thin surface. It is something that cannot be applied by any known method by a person. It doesn’t soak into the fiber at all, nor penetrate.
However that does NOT explain how this pyro-chemical (heat related chemical), melanoidin Maillard Reaction, which is similar to the way newspaper yellows with age, and bread turns brown in an oven, or closer yet your Grandmother’s white wedding dress is now a pastel beige-yellow, resulted in a high-definition image of a Man on a cloth without the use of any lens, artifact, of known force. (See above for the other criteria for the image.) Most of the attempts at making a reproduction Shroud lack obviously that high-definition, or if they have it, they fail due to using something that is obviously showing up as pigment, fixative, or fail in another criteria not found on the shroud, and many lack good 3D quality. Recall also they are working backwards with the knowledge of what they have to reproduce. Whoever made the Shroud, if it was done by a man in the 14th Century, had no idea about any of that. A sheet with sheep’s blood would likely have done as well, given the state of artistic representation of the time.
Almost all of the attempts have gone with transfer pigments from human or statue, heat char from statue, chemical burning on statue, and photographic from statue or human model approaches. They ALL fail by failing the testing for pigments, fixatives, and/or not matching the real shroud’s image modality, thus the attempts not showing it was an artifact of man made artistry.
I doubt it, not even with today’s advancements. Possibly using radiation techniques, which I suspect the “forger” had no access. lol