Crazy f66r

[Jorge_Stolfi]

f66r is a crazy folio.

Indeed. 
about this one?

I think this is no retracer.

On the contrary, retracing is the only thing that I can think of that can explain the ink patterns on the text.  (It does not explain the labels and letters columns, though.)

For example, the last croplet in your post has a k with a very dark right half and a semi-faded left half. If the right half was added afterwards, this would mean there had been an incomplete Voynich glyph initially. And there is absolutely no trace of any previous right half under the quite thin dark right leg of this k.

Here is what I see in that croplet:
   

(A) Original trace of the loop of the k - invisible now.

(B) The bottom 2/3 of the tail of the q is probably original. The top 1/3 of the tail and the head are from the first round of retracing (Rt1), but there are a couple of dots from later rounds (Rt2,Rt3).

( C) Plume of the original glyph, which was s not d. Only a bit of it is barely visible, detached from the body of the original s.

(D) Retracer Rt1 mistook what remained of the s plume for the loop of a d, and restored it that way.  Retracer Rt2 reinforced the mistake.

(E) Original arm of the P in the CPh platform gallows.

(F) Original or Rt1 part of the right loop of the P.

(G) Retracer Rt1 did not see or understand the arm (E), got confused by the C and added  a hook that merged with the C. Retracer Rt2 reinforced the mistake.

(H) Retracer Rt2 mistook the descending part of the P arm for a right leg, and extended it straight down, past the elbow, until the platform slash. 

(R ) Lighter ink by Rt1 visible inside the loop of the k that was retraced by Rt2 or Rt3. 

(S) Lighter ink by Rt1 visible inside the loop of the d that was retraced bt Rt2 or Rt3.

All the best, --jorge