[split] Jorge's Retracer Thread: darker ink, retracing of text and drawings

[eggyk]

But doing it this way increases the risk of aligning things that are not really aligned.  Are those two ls really aligned with the question mark, as in your previous alignment image, or are they in fact 0.5 mm to the left?

By "smaller area", I meant the symbol in question + the text immediately around it, not just the area containing only those marks. For example: 

   

You see that both the eva t (to the bottom left, and the bottom middle) are aligned, along with many other symbols. Even in such a small area though, a couple of glyphs are slightly off. That's because the further you go away from the place where you chose to align, the worse the alignment gets. I would imagine the text near the holes is the best matching on your scan, for example.

But you can see from this context - in my opinion - that the double eva l clearly corresponds to the marks seen in the "?". This can be seen with the matching text around the area. Whether a retracer drew a question mark or not is a different issue. 

And I'm not sure about matching the image using the holes either. This would only work if the parchment is uniform, which it is not. When matching via the holes it becomes quite clear that you will not be able to match all of the text this way. I highly recommend trying your exact process on the multispectral scans, if possible.

These discrepancies would make a big difference when evaluating the influence of seethrough on a specific glyph.  But when one considers a whole word or line, these discrepancies do not seem relevant: overall, the "anchiton" text does not seem to be aligned or influenced by the seethrough.

Edit, I missed this line, and agree with you on that.   I'm only mentioning this in case one image gets used to evaluate the influence for specific glyphs.