(29-12-2016, 12:08 PM)Wolfgang99 wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.it is your point of view.
with a close photo or at least 600/700 DPI enlargement I give the solution (deciphering)
it is not so difficult. this is an academic challenge
If I lose I apologize, If I win Beinecke will cut a sorry figure
Yes, it is my point of view, but I have a lot of experience with quill pens and different writing surfaces and I know what is possible and not possible on such a small scale. I also can see that the VMS scribes were not highly skilled at calligraphy.
In addition to experience with pens, I have done a significant amount of macro photography and I know that what you can see with a digital camera or scanner is more than one can see with the unaided eye for certain kinds of details.
For each curve or tick mark to have a different meaning, and for each glyph to thus have 5 to 10 different letters/syllables/words encoded into one letter is improbable given the difficulty of controlling the pen at such a small scale. The text would have to be about three times bigger and even then, it would be a challenge to do it consistently so that it can be read back later.
I'm not trying to discourage you. It's a creative idea, and Frances Bacon created ciphers that were dependent on fine details, so it's not unprecedented, but the physical difficulties of applying it in a manuscript the size of the VMS are considerable.


![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)