+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Physical material (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-42.html)
+--- Thread: Colors (/thread-1484.html)
Pages:
1
2
Colors - VViews - 01-02-2017
Hi everyone,
sadly I have so far been unable to retrieve any part of the thread that I had started on this subject, so here we are.
I can't remember everything that was posted in the previous thread, but I do recall the reference to ReneZ's list of extraneous writing in the Voynich, which can be found You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
Based on that list, the potential color annotations visible in the Voynich are:
f1v: A single 'g' under the paint of the second leftmost green leaf
f2r: Voynich text (ios an on ?) under green paint of bottom right leaf (middle petal)
f4r: A capital F in the rightmost flower
The word 'rot' written vertically in the stem of the plant
f9v: A single 'g' to the right of the top right flower
Several characters in the top left flower under the blue paint: 'por' in the top petal, 'p' in the lower left petal and 'r' in the lower right petal
f20r: A 'p' (or possibly an 'r') at the top of the root system
28v: Some apparent symbols in the middle of the flower
32r: A 'p' and what looks like a 'v' or an 'r' in the bottom right flower. There could be another character after the 'p'.
39v: A capital B in the white space between the two green part of the bottom right leaf.
I also recall mentioning the work of Patricia Stirnemann, and have found additional links which may be of interest to those who want to look into color annotations.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I need to go back and read that article again but I do remember that it mentioned that color annotations appear irregularly within a given MS, and that color indications often show the sequence in which alternating colors were to be painted. Both of these observations seemed broadly consistent with what can be seen in the Voynich.
Additionally, I found this article by Andreas Petzold which also deals with color annotations:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I apologize for not remembering the other contributions to the thread, please repost if you do!
RE: Colors - Anton - 01-02-2017
I remember that I suggested the possible shortage of paint as the factor to be considered when discussing Voynich colors.
RE: Colors - Wladimir D - 01-02-2017
Another suggestion. The alternation of painted and unpainted leaves f11r, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (the tail of raccoon), You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (if you doubt that there is alternation, then consider the amount of petioles), f28v, f37v, f43r, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. done to impart contrast of the image and the possibility of identifying a large plant in the "root - leaves".
So small pattern plants with alternating green and white leaf on f102v2 page (left middle), I identify with f43r.
Evidence that the alternation colors used to contrast can be seen when comparing the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. leaves and small analogue f102r1, where all the 4 leaf - green. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I think if the last obstacle for the identification of the plant is the color of flower, then this can be ignored.
RE: Colors - VViews - 01-02-2017
Interesting Wladimir D, and I agree about your last statement.
I looked at the folios you mentioned and had a bit of a surprise when looking at 22v. Is that a "G", or possibly "A G" in one of the leaves or is it a trick of the paint? It appears in both the jasondavies and Beinecke scans.
![[Image: image.jpg?q=f22v-537-611-377-240]](https://voynich.ninja/extractor/image.jpg?q=f22v-537-611-377-240)
Based on Stirnemann and Petzold's articles, A G might indicate gold (Aurum) and Green... and these happen to be the two colors that are used in the leaves and stems. But this might just all be a trick of the paint/scans/bleedthrough.
Going back to those articles I mentioned above, it is interesting to note that the authors disagree about who the annotations were intended for: Stirnemann argues that they are reminders left by the artist for himself, while Petzold believes they are a sign of collaborative work and the division of labor.
Both authors note that these annotations show that the artists were literate and probably multilingual, combining latin and vernacular in their annotations.
Both authors explain that the usual process was to do one color at a time, for example, all of the yellow would have been added to the MS, then all of the red, etc... which seems really consistent with what we see in the Voynich (and is also compatible with Anton's observation above).
RE: Colors - Anton - 01-02-2017
This is really something interesting and I don't think that it can be explained by the drawings on the reverse side of the folio.
Playing with graphical adjustments, I'd say that the first lwo letters are capital A and capital B, and then some letters follow forming something like a signature: "ABach" or "ABucz".
RE: Colors - Koen G - 02-02-2017
To me it looks more like some large signs in top of a row of smaller signs. The bar on the A is very low, making it almost look like a delta. Of the B or G I only see the top horizontal stroke and the left vertical one, forming a hook. Bottom row I see something like ?83?y
RE: Colors - Diane - 02-02-2017
I may be mistaken here, but I think Philip Neal was among the first to comment intelligently on the manuscript's 'hidden letters' and there is also much of interest about them in Nick Pelling's book Curse of the Voynich (2006) and in his later blogposts.
While later writers may build on the original researchers' comments and correctly acknowledge them, it is important to have read, and to cite, the earlier work. Apart from anything else it saves rediscovering things already discovered and creates a solid line of development for re-examination by those who have come more recently to the study.
Personally, I think that some of the things which earlier scholars assumed is long overdue for re-investigation, but that is no reason to pass over the fact that they contributed original insights which remain valuable and on which many later writers relied.
RE: Colors - Diane - 02-02-2017
Anton,
Shortage of colours isn't such a good argument when considering the fifteenth century. Colours didn't come pre-mixed in tubes, and if one had a red and a blue, using just a little of each to create a mauve or purple would be one way to make both go further - but this wasn't done. Another way to make paints go further would be to thin them - easily done but again we find that some of the pigments have been applied thickly, which would seem to me to indicate either an environment unlike what we find in the usual Latin scriptoria and ateliers, or an intention to use only the colours which are used. Not accident but intent.
Which takes us to the really big issue, so commonly slid over: why does the manuscript constantly present objections to the theory that it is in some way an 'ordinary' Latin European product, just one with a few peculiarities?
RE: Colors - Anton - 02-02-2017
Quote:Anton,
Shortage of colours isn't such a good argument when considering the fifteenth century. Colours didn't come pre-mixed in tubes, and if one had a red and a blue, using just a little of each to create a mauve or purple would be one way to make both go further - but this wasn't done. Another way to make paints go further would be to thin them - easily done but again we find that some of the pigments have been applied thickly, which would seem to me to indicate either an environment unlike what we find in the usual Latin scriptoria and ateliers, or an intention to use only the colours which are used. Not accident but intent.
Well, this may have been one way or another, it's really difficult to say. I think that "thinning" the paints is what we see in the "zodiac" section. And painting/creating different sections of the MS may have been separated in time, so that e.g. one began with no lack of paints, but somewhat later experienced the shortage.
RE: Colors - Sam G - 02-02-2017
It's interesting that the range of colors used seems to vary throughout the manuscript. For instance, red is used most extensively in the Herbal A section, and very little in Herbal B. In the Pharmaceutical section it is used quite a bit in the jars, but only rarely in the plants.
The nine-rosette page, and the pages on the reverse, only use blue and yellow. It appears that these two colors mix a bit in a few places to form a sort of green, though I'm not sure if that was intentional. But it's strange that the most visually spectacular illustration in the manuscript should have such drab colors. Also, the nymphs on the reverse of the nine-rosette page, along with the ones on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and f66r, appear to be the only ones in the VMS lacking rouged cheeks (which are found on all the nymphs in the Zodiac and Bio sections).
This could be taken as evidence that whoever did the colors on the nine-rosette page was not the same person who colored the other sections. But, if we look at the right-center rosette, inside the "cloud", we see that it has been filled in with blue paint in such a way as to create a kind of mottled texture. I'm not sure how exactly it was produced, but we see the exact same effect on f68v3, and it seems likely that the same person colored both of these pages. Yet f68v3 is on the same foldout bifolio as pages that contain other colors, such as red and green. I suppose there are several ways this could be interpreted, but if one person colored the entire 67-68 bifolio, and the same person colored the nine-rosette page, then presumably he still had access to the same pigments, which means he either never finished the job or (more likely, IMO) the lack of red and green on the nine-rosette page was intentional, or those colors simply weren't called for.