Home > News & Views > More about banding on the Shroud of Turin

More about banding on the Shroud of Turin

August 29, 2014

imageHugh Farey has prepared a helpful, four page, image rich PDF document on Banding on the Shroud of Turin. He points out, for instance, in referring to this image on the right:

This is the top of the alleged band which Barrie
Schwortz felt needed adjusting in density to
restore the image to a more realistic
appearance. It is two ‘pitches’ (1) wide, and
defined on the right by a bunch of thin warp
threads (2) forming the prominent stripe
visible on the Enrie image, and on the left, less
clearly, by the adjacent pitch (3), which is
darkened by ‘hair.’

Hugh concludes:

Conclusion. The weave of the cloth does produce the illusion of bands according to its illumination, which serve to enhance a viewer’s perception of the intensity of the image at various places, and give the illusion of over-defined dark and light bands in various places which are not as clearly vertical sided as they appear.. So the light vertical areas defining the sides of the cheeks are really present, but they are not as precise or as well defined as they appear, and are not merely artifacts of the cloth, but real areas where the image making process just didn’t happen.

Categories: News & Views Tags:
  1. August 29, 2014 at 1:25 pm

    What’s the betting that Hugh’s pre-secondary (?) school pupils are not old enough to realize they have a scientific heavy-hitter as head of department.?

    Some of us are old enough to recall the days when UK science teachers had their own journal for reporting their original scientific research (Physics Review?). Maybe they still do. It was ostensibly project-based for classes, but would have passed muster in any mainstream scientific journal.

    You are a throw-back Hugh – in the nicest possible way.

  2. anoxie
    August 29, 2014 at 3:08 pm

    “Illusion” ? Hugh, if you leech, at least do it intelligently.

    • Hugh Farey
      August 29, 2014 at 3:28 pm

      What on earth does this mean?

      • anoxie
        August 29, 2014 at 4:10 pm

        Another problem of translation?

  3. Thibault HEIMBURGER
    August 29, 2014 at 4:43 pm

    Hugh, in your conclusion, I read:
    ” So the light vertical
    areas defining the sides of the cheeks are really
    present, but they are not as precise or as well
    defined as they appear, and are not merely
    artifacts of the cloth, but real areas where the
    image making process just didn’t happen.”

    I think you have just shown the contrary.

    Can you please explain me the steps of your reasoning by using the most simple English words as possible ?

    Thank you.

  4. Hugh Farey
    August 29, 2014 at 5:35 pm

    It is difficult to convey, I understand. What I’m saying is that all the darker areas on the shroud are shaped entirely by whatever it was that made the image, and are not artifacts of the cloth. There are no clearly defined straight lines. However, where, by coincidence, the edge of a darker patch more or less coincides with a natural line in the cloth, usually one of the spines connecting two directions of herringbone ‘pitch’, then it appears to an observer that the area is defined by that line, especially when it is observed from a distance where the weave of the cloth is not itself clear. Thus the sides of the cheeks appear to be cut off by a clear vertical edge, when in fact they are not so well defined; they just appear so because of the weave. A photo tends to emphasise this effect, which would, I suspect, be much less obvious if the cloth itself could be inspected from different angles.

    • Dan
      August 30, 2014 at 7:22 am

      Sorry, Hugh, but this seems like ‘I think I see that I think I see.’ Let’s just say that I am skeptical here of your skepticism. But that is okay. Now I have something more to think about while I walk the dog and watch the alligators swimming in the lagoon on this beautiful South Carolina morning.

    • Thibault HEIMBURGER
      August 30, 2014 at 2:15 pm

      Thank you Hugh for clarification.

      ” The face on the shroud has a ‘vertically aligned’ look, with sharply cut-off cheeks and vertically falling hair. The question is, are these light bands true representations of the model (dead body, bas relief,painting or whatever), or are they artifacts of the cloth, or of the photographs in which they appear?”

      The banding problem is not some kind of “all or nothing”.

      There are several kinds of bands on the Shroud. Here we are speaking of the alternated regular light and dark vertical bands.
      You have shown that these bands are clearly connected to the herringbone weave of the fabric. I fully agree and some weeks ago I also discovered the same fact in the hands area.

      The light bands on both sides of the TS man face are connected to the herringbone weave ( ‘pitch’) of the fabric.

      “So the light vertical areas defining the sides of the cheeks are really present, but they are not as precise or as well defined as they appear, and are not merely artifacts of the cloth, but real areas where the image making process just didn’t happen.”

      How can you conclude that in those areas “the image making process just didn’t happen.”





      Thierry Castex is a true expert in imaging techniques.

      From Castex and your studies, one can conclude:
      1) there is an image in these light vertical areas.
      2) The light vertical bands are closely related to the herringbone weave
      3) If you exclude the effect of the weave, you obtain a much more realistic image.

      Now, the true question is: how can we explain the relationship between the herringbone weave and the image ?

      • anoxie
        August 30, 2014 at 3:10 pm

        Just tell me, this is a joke or you haven’t read the post: banding? Is it real?

      • Hugh Farey
        August 30, 2014 at 6:11 pm

        Thanks so much for posting the Castex link, which has explained much that I didn’t understand when anoxie simply posted some of his images. I think we are close to agreeing, except that I think the effect of the weave is apparent rather than actual, and perhaps would not be visible at all under different lighting conditions. That may be an answer to your ‘true question.’

        • anoxie
          August 31, 2014 at 2:07 am

          “1- it’s a sharp, clear-cut edge
          2- the dark band on the face starts on a spike
          3- the zig zag pattern has an independent role on image perception (image – différence)
          Synchronisation ? Let’s have a break on banding and the “no sharp edge” claim of CB.”

          Third time.

          And i can’t resume the whole thread.

          I’ve largely mentionned these three point based on this image to explain why banding is real and not an illusion.

          I’ve suggested to Dan to insert at least this image in the post where he has promoted “a new paradigm”.


          This is a farce.

        • Thibault HEIMBURGER
          August 31, 2014 at 2:57 pm

          Hi Hugh,

          Unfortunately Shroud 2.0 app is only for those who have an Ipad etc. I do not understand why Shroud 2.0 is not available for Android and/or Windows !!

          However, my friend Sebastien sent me months ago some pictures from Shroud 2.0. I also have many HD pictures from HaltaDefinizioni, as well as Enrie, Durante, Barrie Shwortz and Flury-Lemberg photographs.

          In all of them the “banding effect” is obvious.
          Of course, it is more or less marked, depending on the illumination. But it is there.
          By “banding effect”, I mean: the fact that the alternation of light and dark vertical (and horizontal) bands impacts on the TS image density.

          You wrote for example (in your PDF): ” We can now see a number of narrow vertical stripes, but the light and dark ‘bands’ do not extend into the hair”
          I disagree. The light and dark ‘bands’ do extend into the hair.
          Moreover there are also some horizontal bands which are clearly seen in some photographs that also impacts on the TS image density.

          The banding effect is not an illusion.

          Whatever the imaging process,the TS image,as we see it, is the result of the interaction between the “template” (“dead body, bas relief, painting or whatever”) and the cloth.

          I strongly suspect that the “banding effect” is one of the keys of the understanding of the TS image.

          However, I have no time enough to study it in depth for the moment. I have to write my third and last PDF about the “scorch hypothesis” and much more.

          If Hugh or anybody else wants to contact me for more information, just send me an email ( just ask Dan if necessary).

  5. anoxie
    August 30, 2014 at 2:06 am

    To discuss the paper, this may be helpful too:

    It is not an illusion, it is real. But i already knew Hugh was an illusionist, it all started with cotton fibers.

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: