+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: News (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-25.html)
+--- Thread: [Movie] HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN (/thread-1358.html)
RE: HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN - -JKP- - 26-07-2017
(26-07-2017, 11:46 AM)Wolfgang99 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(25-07-2017, 09:49 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Wolfgang, your solution is worthless if you need others to use it for you. If you are certain about your system, you should be able to decipher the Voynich yourself.
as I said ad nauseam, 400 DPI Beinecke enlargements are not enough, I need at least 700/800 DPI, it is not so difficult
letter saw at microscope matches a voynich letter I found, please watch video for more details
...
And as I have said, ad nauseum, and demonstrated with a picture of a ruler over the folios, the scans we see are higher resolution than what the scribe with the quill pen had to work with.
I think you should try to USE a quill pen on vellum and see how many unique shapes you can fit into half a centimeter. Maybe then you would appreciate how difficult it is to replicate shapes, even ones the full size of a glyph. Trying to replicate subtle shapes 1/8th the size of a glyph or smaller consistently enough that you can recognize them when you see them again could only be done with a microscope, an unusually steady hand, and special drawing tools (not a quill pen).
Whoever penned the VMS was not skilled with a pen and was dealing with a bumpy surface. That is obvious from the slant, the wiggles, and the very uneven flow of the ink. Some of the differences in macro shapes might be meaningful (like the length of a tail), but not 12 individual strokes that make up a letter. I don't believe it.
RE: HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN - Anton - 26-07-2017
Just to add that first microscopes are dated to two hundred years later after the VMS has been penned.
RE: HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN - ReneZ - 26-07-2017
Whatever has been produced by a medieval scribe is not going to escape notice from a 400 dpi digital image.
That's the reasonable part of it.
The problematic part is that, when people are completely convinced of their own theories, there is nothing that one can say or do to change their minds. They ignore everything that is counter to their conviction. They are completely resistant to reasonable arguments.
We have seen a few cases of that in this forum already, and I have had quite a bit more experience with this type of attitude.
So...
I don't expect for a minute that the picture I show below will change anything, but once an optimist, always an optimist.
RE: HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN - Wolfgang99 - 27-07-2017
(26-07-2017, 05:18 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(26-07-2017, 11:46 AM)Wolfgang99 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(25-07-2017, 09:49 AM)Koen Gh. Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Wolfgang, your solution is worthless if you need others to use it for you. If you are certain about your system, you should be able to decipher the Voynich yourself.
as I said ad nauseam, 400 DPI Beinecke enlargements are not enough, I need at least 700/800 DPI, it is not so difficult
letter saw at microscope matches a voynich letter I found, please watch video for more details
...
And as I have said, ad nauseum, and demonstrated with a picture of a ruler over the folios, the scans we see are higher resolution than what the scribe with the quill pen had to work with.
I think you should try to USE a quill pen on vellum and see how many unique shapes you can fit into half a centimeter. Maybe then you would appreciate how difficult it is to replicate shapes, even ones the full size of a glyph. Trying to replicate subtle shapes 1/8th the size of a glyph or smaller consistently enough that you can recognize them when you see them again could only be done with a microscope, an unusually steady hand, and special drawing tools (not a quill pen).
Whoever penned the VMS was not skilled with a pen and was dealing with a bumpy surface. That is obvious from the slant, the wiggles, and the very uneven flow of the ink. Some of the differences in macro shapes might be meaningful (like the length of a tail), but not 12 individual strokes that make up a letter. I don't believe it.
Mr. Koen, Mr. Anton, first of all thank you for your review, every contribution is valued: you are right about quill and stencil, as I show in my last video “BACK TO REAL DIMENSION”
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
the quill point is too thick to write easily within stencil, anyway it has been very useful to face with real dimensions because I defined these things:
CONCLUSIONS
First of all to work / write at this magnification level I used a light head magnifying glass 3,5 X (not a microscope) perfectly compatible with 15th century technology, I attach photo of glasses I used, plastic lenses 3,5 X
I used a brass foil about 0.2 mm. thick, more workable if gold, details available can be found in 15 th century jewelry; I made a stencil measuring 18 x 12 mm. high like original
Probably they did not use a quill that moves difficulty within stencil but a very simple pen-nib like the type I used (it does not take a very big mental and technologic jump to think of making a quill point using metal to write thinner ...)
IMPORTANT! Every stencil is a only piece, I do not have to make it equal to something else, it is important that curves are different from each other in order to distinguish them.
And I have a last check, the LATIN WORD, every Voynich letter contains a Latin word: even if I don’t recognize one microscopic symbol I recognize the word like: Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteers be at the rghit pclae
That's all. Giuseppe Bianchi
RE: HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN - Wolfgang99 - 27-07-2017
(26-07-2017, 07:13 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Whatever has been produced by a medieval scribe is not going to escape notice from a 400 dpi digital image.
That's the reasonable part of it.
The problematic part is that, when people are completely convinced of their own theories, there is nothing that one can say or do to change their minds. They ignore everything that is counter to their conviction. They are completely resistant to reasonable arguments.
We have seen a few cases of that in this forum already, and I have had quite a bit more experience with this type of attitude.
So...
I don't expect for a minute that the picture I show below will change anything, but once an optimist, always an optimist.
Mr. Zandbergen! You mark a turning point! This is an enlargement, only two words but maybe is right to open archives with dropper. Thank you very much, finally I see Voynich letters! And my pinholes!
Now I will try to map these two words with a CAD program and give a possible solution of meaning even if, everyone can understand, the sample is very very little but is better than nothing, it is an ENLARGEMENT and I can see Voynich letters/microscopic symbols.
I am obliged to you
Giuseppe Bianchi
RE: HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN - -JKP- - 27-07-2017
(27-07-2017, 09:03 AM)Wolfgang99 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
I used a brass foil about 0.2 mm. thick, more workable if gold, details available can be found in 15 th century jewelry; I made a stencil measuring 18 x 12 mm. high like original
Probably they did not use a quill that moves difficulty within stencil but a very simple pen-nib like the type I used (it does not take a very big mental and technologic jump to think of making a quill point using metal to write thinner ...)
...
That's all. Giuseppe Bianchi
I see no evidence that these shapes were made with a stencil. Stenciled images have a certain look and feel to them.
I see no evidence that the letters were written with a special kind of nib. The text has all the characteristics of the kind of quills that were common at the time and, in fact, it's a bit clumsier and messier than professional book-hand manuscripts.
I see no evidence that whoever penned it had the dexterity, tools or skill to encode 5 or 10 extremely precise shapes into one glyph.
RE: HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN - Anton - 27-07-2017
I would like to note that many glyphs, as it is evident, underwent emendation by subsequent users of the book. Which would of course destroy the alleged micrography.
RE: HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN - Wolfgang99 - 28-07-2017
(27-07-2017, 06:57 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I would like to note that many glyphs, as it is evident, underwent emendation by subsequent users of the book. Which would of course destroy the alleged micrography.
of course, but also rotating stencil onto letters to find microscopic simbols and rotating page folds onto wheels damaged the writing (especially zodiacal wheels)
RE: HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN - -JKP- - 28-07-2017
(28-07-2017, 06:55 AM)Wolfgang99 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(27-07-2017, 06:57 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I would like to note that many glyphs, as it is evident, underwent emendation by subsequent users of the book. Which would of course destroy the alleged micrography.
of course, but also rotating stencil onto letters to find microscopic simbols and rotating page folds onto wheels damaged the writing (especially zodiacal wheels)
So your idea is that a stencil was laid on the parchment, the scribe chose a shape that represents a phrase/word/syllable, scribed it with a special quill through a tiny opening in the stencil (which almost inevitably causes ink to bleed out under the stencil because this is iron gall ink NOT ballpoint pen ink), then the scribe waits a few minutes for the ink to dry (you can't put a stencil down on top of fresh gall ink without smudging the previous lines) and then lines up the new stencil with the end of the first line and creates a new line, etc., etc., until a phrase or sentence is encoded into one glyph.
Using your method, it would take a twenty minutes to one hour to create one glyph when you factor in the time it takes the ink to dry enough to lay a stencil down on top of the previous lines. A word would take two to four hours.
Try it yourself, with gall ink. You can buy it online. You can also buy quills online. Don't use modern inks, they are formulated differently. See how long it takes you to encode one word well enough so that someone who has been shown your code can read back the shapes.
RE: HOW VOYNICH WAS WRITTEN - Wolfgang99 - 28-07-2017
(28-07-2017, 08:27 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(28-07-2017, 06:55 AM)Wolfgang99 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(27-07-2017, 06:57 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I would like to note that many glyphs, as it is evident, underwent emendation by subsequent users of the book. Which would of course destroy the alleged micrography.
of course, but also rotating stencil onto letters to find microscopic simbols and rotating page folds onto wheels damaged the writing (especially zodiacal wheels)
So your idea is that a stencil was laid on the parchment, the scribe chose a shape that represents a phrase/word/syllable, scribed it with a special quill through a tiny opening in the stencil (which almost inevitably causes ink to bleed out under the stencil because this is iron gall ink NOT ballpoint pen ink), then the scribe waits a few minutes for the ink to dry (you can't put a stencil down on top of fresh gall ink without smudging the previous lines) and then lines up the new stencil with the end of the first line and creates a new line, etc., etc., until a phrase or sentence is encoded into one glyph.
Using your method, it would take a twenty minutes to one hour to create one glyph when you factor in the time it takes the ink to dry enough to lay a stencil down on top of the previous lines. A word would take two to four hours.
Try it yourself, with gall ink. You can buy it online. You can also buy quills online. Don't use modern inks, they are formulated differently. See how long it takes you to encode one word well enough so that someone who has been shown your code can read back the shapes.
First of all thank you, you are one of the few had understood my thesis. please watch my last video "Back to real dimensions"
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I draw a Gliph using Indian ink, first a quill and then a pen-nib. Brass stencil was made by myself. You point the problem: You need obviously a bit of a practice not to “wick” ink under the stencil, but stencils used in pen-and-ink drawing do not match the sheet precisely to prevent ink from slipping between paper and stencil for capillarity because they have a concave (shelled) border. Anyway they had to wait some time between drawing a shape/letter/microscopic symbol and another and probably they have also to use a desk pad. I think they used this complicated writing system that takes a lot of time to hide a great secret that justify this engagement, almost for that times