David Mo, Hugh Farey and others have convinced me by their many thoughtful comments that the Vignon Markings, as presently understood, are invalid. This is particularly true, in my opinion, for the double wavy line on the neck and the topless square or flat-bottomed U as it is sometimes called. If we want to preserve the concept of identifying facial portraits of Jesus derived from the Holy Shroud we need to revise Vignon’s pioneering work. This time we have the benefit of many more examples because of the Internet. The Internet also makes it easier to undertake this work as a multidisciplinary project.
It would be wonderful if an interim report could be prepared in time for the St. Louis Conference. The message being, "Vignon was wrong but we’ll carry on."
This is probably a wrap on the Vignon markings, that is unless Ann’s proposal is implemented. Good idea? Volunteers? The best recent comments seem to be in these three threads: