Interesting that you've chosen the roots of You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. as it was not all that long ago that there was a discussion of those roots on this forum.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
(08-02-2024, 08:03 PM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Interesting that you've chosen the roots of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. as it was not all that long ago that there was a discussion of those roots on this forum.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Seems to represent the same thing
I'm afraid I remain unconvinced. Though I believe what you have presented so far is still only a very small sampling of the work you have done, I can't get beyond the idea that this is your deliberate manipulation of a copy of an image, and by your own admission a poor quality one at that because that is what worked best for you, in order to achieve what you expected, possibly even desired, as a result and not the revelation of anything that actually exists in the VM. You worked to prove your hypothesis to yourself until you had the right variables under which to repeat the results in other images. So of course you now see the same results every time you work at it because you, and not the VM's author, have engineered it that way. Whether that is entirely a conscious choice on your part or at least partly a subconscious one, I can't be sure. In any case, maybe I'm just not getting what you're trying to convey but it seems to me that your results, though interesting from an artistic standpoint, tell us nothing useful that can help solve the mystery of the VM.
To be fair, I believe that this does happen a lot in VM research. More often than many of us would likely care to admit.
You yourself have indicated that without having the original to work with there may be no way for you to further prove what you believe you have found. While thankfully that isn't possible, it may actually be possible another way. As in if a VM folio could be successfully forged so as to provide multiple source copies close enough to the original to be used as your test subjects instead. (And yes, I realize the irony of what I am suggesting, given there are still prevailing thoughts that the VM itself is a very clever hoax.) Your tests would then be physical ones rather than digital - in place of Photoshop's Gaussian Blur and Dodge and Burn tools, you would use actual water and fire, and varying types thereof (e.g. deionized, drinking and rain water and fire, smoke and heat damage caused by candle, wood, gas and electrical flames). Technologically, I believe all the elements present in the original - from the vellum to the iron gall ink (and the quills to apply it) to the elements used to make the paints (and the hand mixing of them as well as the tools with which to apply them) to the aging process and the damages that have occurred over the years - can be replicated today with sufficient accuracy so as to achieve better, more convincing, results than the digital work you have done.
If, as you have also said, such forgeries, in much the same way as the high resolution Beinecke scans you have worked with, would not be a low enough resolution, would not be a poor enough quality as test subjects in order to replicate the results by comparison to your current digital results, it might relatively disprove your hypothesis. Were such tests to prove your hypothesis, I might be convinced of its merit, though I'm still not sure if this would provide any answers towards a VM solution. However, I shudder to think of the time, effort, cost and ultimate destruction of what would surely be works of art in their own right.
Until then, this is obviously very satisfying to you personally and likely it is helping you further develop your skills as a graphic artist. And I do find your results intriguing, artistically, as I suspect do others reading this thread. As I'm very fond of pointing out here, the journey is its own reward and that in and of itself is justification for you to continue your work. There is always something that can be learned from every effort made, albeit perhaps not the intended one. Thanks for sharing your insight with us.
Thank you very much for your feedback. I am glad you are not convinced, gives me the drive to work harder. The quality and explanation I send could be improved as well. I should make a video and explain while working on it.
I asked myself this question if it's in my head, my imagination for the last 8 years, I know how to discern reality from illusion. I have been a graphic designer using photoshop for almost 25 years. And still strongly believe in my theory.
What you said about this not helping solve anything from the VM, you are right. But what I have seen for instance, most of the nymphs are roman empire looking soldiers. They all have blond hair which translates to the golden hats with red stones and long tail.. There are also lots of symbols and letters that I will show you as well. Clues to look out for these are certain letters and numbers in leaves and stems.. that for me is an indication to look out for that.
I also think some defects were done by the author as part of the design and concealment.
And to be clear, I did not actually mean I would destroy the VM if I had the chance to see it physically and I did not think anybody would actually think that. I am grateful we have technology and I believe with it we will uncover the mystery of the VM.
Thanks
Emmanuela
Hello Moonchild, welcome to the forums.
Your approach is a kind of "cool" and "fun", it would certainly interest more casual people that some "boring" statistical analysis of patterns in the text : ) But I have my doubts as well.
You could hear the word "steganography". It's a technique of hiding some context in ordinary looking text or picture - You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. I believe that you suggest that Voynich Manuscript contains such kind of stuff.
You work with Photoshop. I hope that we all agree here that it was not an option in 15th century ; ) So my question is - if Voynich contains some hidden message, what would be technique of reading it in a traditional way? Would it be some invisible ink or something like that? Do you have some ideas?
A simple control experiment would be to try the same blur + dodge and burn procedure on some other image (other manuscript, random drawing). Voynichese research can occasionally be better than crank research that consists in looking for confirmation only.
(09-02-2024, 11:38 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Hello Moonchild, welcome to the forums.
Your approach is a kind of "cool" and "fun", it would certainly interest more casual people that some "boring" statistical analysis of patterns in the text : ) But I have my doubts as well.
You could hear the word "steganography". It's a technique of hiding some context in ordinary looking text or picture - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. I believe that you suggest that Voynich Manuscript contains such kind of stuff.
You work with Photoshop. I hope that we all agree here that it was not an option in 15th century ; ) So my question is - if Voynich contains some hidden message, what would be technique of reading it in a traditional way? Would it be some invisible ink or something like that? Do you have some ideas?
Hello Rafal, thank you : )
I am not sure if this would be considered steganography.
Yes, they did not have photoshop back then, that we all agree on ! I do have some idea, as I was saying, I think either you need to scrub or blur by adding water or oil on the pages with or without paint. Either empty space or colored space and the colours would spread out, they would blur. The text part would be very dark since they are shapes very close to each other. They would not be 100% black. Sometimes they form shapes from top to bottom of paragraph on the right edges. Sometimes the words especially on the Rosette that are standing alone are actual letters. 1 word=1 letter. etc..
(10-02-2024, 03:18 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.A simple control experiment would be to try the same blur + dodge and burn procedure on some other image (other manuscript, random drawing). Voynichese research can occasionally be better than crank research that consists in looking for confirmation only.
I already did some tests myself. Results are inconclusive on other manuscripts. If anyone comes across a manuscript that looks like scribbled drawings, let me know and I will try. I find other manuscripts look like the end result (my theory) to begin with so there's nothing to uncover.
I posted on here step by step how I do this. Anyone with photoshop skills can repeat the procedure and see for themselves and confirm what I am presenting. I have no special skills but I am good at noticing details and patterns and am a very intuitive person.
In my opinion, it becomes obvious that the plants are objects when you pay attention to the details. And also that they are drawn in 3d. Even before using my photoshop technique... and when my photoshop technique is applied, it just confirms it. (in my opinion) not saying I am right...
Well, it doesn't really matter, but your first assumption:
"Every single plant is symetrical and that is how usually an object is designed. (etc)"
Is not correct.
In early herbal books (also before the Voynich MS), plants may have been drawn symmetrically, or NOT symmetrically. They may have been drawn strictly 2D, or with clear indications that they are 3D objects (e.g. parts being hidden by other parts).
In the study of these early herbals, these are among the aspects that help to classify them, and to see how they evolve.