29-12-2025, 03:34 AM
Did you know that brussels sprouts are hallucinogenic?
Neither did I.
From page f35v, the newly named "Brussels Sprouts" plant:
This clip covers most of the stem of the plant on page f35v. (The image is rotated 90 degrees clockwise so that it will fit on my screen.)
On this clip I can discern at least three layers of ink tracing/retracing: the original traces (Rt0), quite faint now; one pass of retracing (Rt1) that redid many parts of the original outlines; and a second pass (Rt2) that retouched a few spots.
(A0,B0) Examples of original traces (Rt0).
(A1) Example of first retracing pass (Rt1).
(A2) Example of seconds retracing pass (Rt2).
© abrupt transition between Rt0 and Rt1 traces. (D) abrupt transition between Rt0 and Rt2 traces. (E) Abrupt transition from Rt1 to Rt2.
(F0,G0) Original Rt0 traces of the two branches, or maybe pencil sketches. (H0) Imperfect Rt1 retracing of Rt0 trace. (I0) Rt0 trace showing intended depth order of the branches.
(J1,K1) Impossible insertion of branch into stem by Rt1. (L1,M1,N1) Misaligned parts of a branch. (P1,Q1) Impossible crossings of Rt1 outline.
(Q2) Example of second retracing pass (Rt2) trace.
Discussion
There are several illogical details in this drawing that might be explained, at least in part, by misunderstanding of the Retracers.
First, in the current version of this drawing, two of the branches seem to pierce through the stem at (J1) and (K1). However, faint traces (A3,A4) that extend the outlines of the branches beyond their insertion points, as if the stem was transparent. One possible explanation is that, on the original drawing, the projections of the branches just crossed in front of the stem, without them really crossing in three dimensions. But when Rt1 retraced the outlines, he made some mistakes that were incompatible with the original arrangement. To disguise his mistake, he added the insertion cuts (J1,K1) and made the branches went through the stem.
Another incongruous detail is the misalignment between the two parts of the branch at (L1,M1,N1) that is supposed to cross the stem from behind. Either the original Scribe or the Rt1 retracer mistakenly drew (L1) aligned, leaving (M1) and (N1) off. That the branch (L1,M1,N1) was supposed to cross behind the stem is indicated by the Rt0 line (I0). It is possible that Rt1 misunderstood the spatial arrangement of the branches and retraced them as if they joined at (I0), forming a biologically impossible loop..
Finally, at the points (P1) and (Q1), the Rt1 traces of the branches and leaves cross as if either was transparent. Presumably the Rt0 version had the branches in front of the leaves, but Rt1 carelessly retraced the leaves without caring for the branches.
All the best, --stolfi
Neither did I.
From page f35v, the newly named "Brussels Sprouts" plant:
This clip covers most of the stem of the plant on page f35v. (The image is rotated 90 degrees clockwise so that it will fit on my screen.)
On this clip I can discern at least three layers of ink tracing/retracing: the original traces (Rt0), quite faint now; one pass of retracing (Rt1) that redid many parts of the original outlines; and a second pass (Rt2) that retouched a few spots.
(A0,B0) Examples of original traces (Rt0).
(A1) Example of first retracing pass (Rt1).
(A2) Example of seconds retracing pass (Rt2).
© abrupt transition between Rt0 and Rt1 traces. (D) abrupt transition between Rt0 and Rt2 traces. (E) Abrupt transition from Rt1 to Rt2.
(F0,G0) Original Rt0 traces of the two branches, or maybe pencil sketches. (H0) Imperfect Rt1 retracing of Rt0 trace. (I0) Rt0 trace showing intended depth order of the branches.
(J1,K1) Impossible insertion of branch into stem by Rt1. (L1,M1,N1) Misaligned parts of a branch. (P1,Q1) Impossible crossings of Rt1 outline.
(Q2) Example of second retracing pass (Rt2) trace.
Discussion
There are several illogical details in this drawing that might be explained, at least in part, by misunderstanding of the Retracers.
First, in the current version of this drawing, two of the branches seem to pierce through the stem at (J1) and (K1). However, faint traces (A3,A4) that extend the outlines of the branches beyond their insertion points, as if the stem was transparent. One possible explanation is that, on the original drawing, the projections of the branches just crossed in front of the stem, without them really crossing in three dimensions. But when Rt1 retraced the outlines, he made some mistakes that were incompatible with the original arrangement. To disguise his mistake, he added the insertion cuts (J1,K1) and made the branches went through the stem.
Another incongruous detail is the misalignment between the two parts of the branch at (L1,M1,N1) that is supposed to cross the stem from behind. Either the original Scribe or the Rt1 retracer mistakenly drew (L1) aligned, leaving (M1) and (N1) off. That the branch (L1,M1,N1) was supposed to cross behind the stem is indicated by the Rt0 line (I0). It is possible that Rt1 misunderstood the spatial arrangement of the branches and retraced them as if they joined at (I0), forming a biologically impossible loop..
Finally, at the points (P1) and (Q1), the Rt1 traces of the branches and leaves cross as if either was transparent. Presumably the Rt0 version had the branches in front of the leaves, but Rt1 carelessly retraced the leaves without caring for the branches.
All the best, --stolfi