The claimed Voynich page

[Bernd]

Matching the height of the cover of the Voynich MS to 235 mm, I get that the text in the Voynich MS is roughly 9% larger.

Excellent!
I estimated it would be ~10%. Interesting trivia - the Renaissance portraits Hockney & Falco claimed to have been created with the help of a concave mirror were also estimated to be a 90% magnification, so 10% smaller than the original.

In July 2000, Falco and Hockney published "Optical Insights into Renaissance Art" in Optics & Photonics News, vol. 11, a detailed analysis of the likely use of concave mirrors in certain Renaissance paintings, particularly the Lotto painting. Experiments with a concave mirror (which technically is also a lens) of the calculated properties indeed produced a projected image that was bright and sharp enough to be of use to a painter. They also measured the distances between pupils in 12 examples of portraits with a "photographic quality" from between 1450 and 1565 and found that the pictures all had a magnification of ~90%, and the depicted heads and shoulders all stayed within a circumference of 30 to 50 cm, which corresponded with the sizes of sufficiently clear images projected with the mirror lens.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Optics really isn't my field of science so I'm unable to assess if a mirror lens setup would be feasible to make a copy of a VM page. According to the paper, an area of about 30 x 30 cm was considered the upper limit for usable lens projections, otherwise aberrations become too large. So that neatly fits a VM page. It still begs the question of - why? The artist clearly put much more emphasis on the drawing and layout than the text.