Just suppose Christ did in fact, leave an image of his crucified body behind. Do you think he did so whimsically simply because he could, or do you think he might have had some reason for doing so?
Descriptions of Jesus’ physical appearance seem conspicuous by their absence in the Bible. We can’t even say for certain the color of his hair.
It has always struck me that there was a reason for that. It seems at odds with the fact that there is a total lack of a physical description in the Bible, but we are presented outside the Bible with what amounts to a photograph of His appearance.
Christ himself allowed Thomas, his apostle, to confirm the resurrection by probing his wounds when Thomas expressed his doubts. It seems reasonable to me that Christ would offer some similar means of confirmation to doubters in subsequent ages. Many may not need such physical proof, but Christ offered it to Thomas. Why would he not offer such proof to us?
I don’t see the problem. The burial shroud is a “by-product” of his crucifixion and burial and (depending on how one interprets the image) his resurrectionl. I don’t see it as an question “should I leave this behind me or not.” He suffered, died, was buried, and rose. In the process of burial a shroud was used. That it became imprinted with this image is a consquence. We don’t know how the image was produced, whether it actually suggests some unique process associated with resurrection or whether it’s “just” the result of burial. But either way, it’s just what is. I don’t see this as Jesus asking himself, “should I or shouldn’t I.”
I don’t think it’s helpful to puzzle over that question.
Seems to me I recall Josephus writing that he had chestnut colored hair. He did write a description of Jesus but that’s all I know.