The Book Switch Theory

[proto57]

As far as "vague traces of parts of the signature", it is actually quite better than that. Yes, my 2013 photograph, which still seems to be the only one on the internet, does give that impression.

The original files are on the online yale university library. You can download the (very high resolution) photos here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.



The signature is indeed visible before chemical treatment, and appears to be the same in all visible aspects. It is very faint though. Its obvious that it is there if you're looking for it, but honestly not that obvious if your attention is drawn to the rest of the content. 

Thank you, eggyk: Yes that seems to be an original negative film strip, which I am not sure was online in 2013 or not. If so, I missed it! No matter, it is great, and possibly the source of the "pre-treatment photograph" positive which I photographed in 2013. But also, if you look at the positive I photographed, the tape is in a different place:

Anyway, I disagree that the name would not be obvious. This is unprocessed, by me, and taken directly from the link you provided:

   

All the letters, I think, are there. It may be hard to make out the "z", but all the rest are readable. I think at 1:1 view, this name would be very visible, and readable. But it would certainly draw attention of anyone who saw this negative, and by projecting the image with a film strip projector, even be very readable.

But when I reverse it into a positive image... which of course negatives were intended to do... and in printing, it would have lost no information. I have photographed and processed hundreds of feet of various black and white films, from Pan-X, to Tri-X, lithographic, and more... and it is a very easy matter to control contrast, tone, brightness... in other words, see what we can see today, by reversing the negative into this positive on my computer:

   

I have not altered the brightness, contrast, nor sharpness of that reversal. And I can clearly read the name... although perhaps I might leave off the "z", and write it as, "Tepenec". I think, close enough to see who was being referred to... and, not an "unknown person" to those of the era of discovery of the Voynich.

Rich