Home > Uncategorized > An Offer from Lee Jones (Comment Promoted)

An Offer from Lee Jones (Comment Promoted)

If anybody wants any of the high resolution images of the shroud for their research, drop me an e-mail at djleejay85@google,mail.com I have the enrie image (1.4 gigabytes) the STURP images, the HAL9000 (Haltadefinizione) images from 2008, and the Durante images from 1997,2000,2002 and 2010, They range in size from 500 megabytes up to around 27 gigabytes. I know how much of a ball ache it can be trying to find decent resolution images. Marios shroud scope is a good resource but he converted the TIFF files to JPG and then chopped them up so nobody can download them lol. I have the file he uses which is the 2002 image, personally i think the 2000 image is sharper and reveals more detail. The best out of the lot of them is the Durante 2010 image, it is alot more detailed than the Haltadefinizione images (39 billion pixels if i remember correctly, whereas the haltadefinizione image was 12 billion pixels)

Categories: Uncategorized
  1. March 8, 2019 at 7:48 am

    My I please have them. God bless you. Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

    • Lee Jones
      March 8, 2019 at 10:20 am

      Hi drbhogal, drop me an E-mail an E-Mail and we can have a chat. There are certain images that i have been asked not to leak, such as some of the STURP images, but in my opinion, the STURP images do not have as much detail as say, the Durante image’s or the HAL9000 images.

      • March 8, 2019 at 10:40 am

        @Lee Jones.

        Is your e-mail adress correct? I was unable to send an e-mail to you.

        • Lee Jones
          March 8, 2019 at 10:45 am

          Hello OK, It’s my bad regarding my E-Mail address lol, im guessing that you copied and pasted it ? That wont work as i put a comma in place of a dot lol. So copy and paste this djleejay85@google.mail.com :) Speak soon matey

        • March 8, 2019 at 12:12 pm

          Thank you!
          Sent an e-mail.

        • March 8, 2019 at 12:15 pm

          Adres: djleejay85@google.mail.com Błąd: 4.1.2 : Recipient address rejected: Domain not found

          I don’t know what may be the reason of the problem…

        • March 8, 2019 at 12:20 pm

          Still having some problems with e-mail adress…

  2. March 8, 2019 at 10:32 am

    Hello Lee Jones!

    I wish to put myself in the line for the images.

  3. March 8, 2019 at 11:05 am

    “There are certain images that i have been asked not to leak, such as some of the STURP images”

    Words fail me. Why? Answer (let’s not beat about the bush) : STURP morphed post the early 1980’s into STERA (Shroud of Turin (so-called) Education and Research Association. Repeat: Education and Research.

    Front man presumably a leading STURP scientist?

    Nope. STURP’s Documenting Photographer assumed that role instead, despite being charged in 1978 only with the task of recording the STURP scientists and technicians going about their business.

    Yet he now sports – would you believe it- the title of “President of STERA ” no less (who we’re told very properly declined the role of Scientific Photographer).

    STERA’s miraculously elevated President now travels the world, presenting himself as a born-again scientist. He gives addresses each year at the UK convention of Ahmadiyya Muslims. Why? Well, he’s maybe invited , but why one has to ask? Is it because he shares their belief (apparently) that the Turin Linen provides evidence that the founder of Christianity survived crucifixion and thus cannot be the promised Messiah in either of two non-Christian religions)

    You could’t make it up!

    Well, you could, but only in America! God bless America!

    • Lee Jones
      March 8, 2019 at 11:41 am

      I agree completely Colin. Barrie asked me not to pass them to anyone, or i would send to anyone who wanted them. But like i said in my OP, The STURP image’s are nothing special compared to the later photograph’s/scans of the shroud. I believe Barrie will send anyone some of his images that he took in 1978 if you ask, that is what he did with me. The other images however are not under any copyright law’s (As far as i am aware lol) So i can send them no problem. I have no idea why it is so hard to obtain the high resolution images of the shroud. Its taken me a few years now to build my “shroud research” folder, On my last check, the image file is just over 103 gigabytes. If anybody wants any information on these images of the shroud then just ask. I can provide information such as the resolution of the image, file size, DPI etc etc.

  4. March 8, 2019 at 12:15 pm

    “I believe Barrie will send anyone some of his images that he took in 1978 if you ask, that is what he did with me.”

    But we’re not talking about the photographs that were taken by STURP’s Documenting Photographer (i.e. of scientists etc going about their work.)

    We’re talking about close-up photographs and photomicrographs that were taken by the SCIENTIFIC (not Documenting) photographers as part of the 1978 STURP investigation.

    Yet here you (and myself ) are, some 40 years later, Lee, confirming one’s worst beliefs (mine acquired over some 7 years) namely that STERA is continuing to sit on copyrighted, non-displayed STURP data (albeit photographic) as if it were its own , withholding it from the likes of you, me and other investigators..

    Thank goodness for Mario’s “Shroud Scope” images. No, you’re correct, his valuable Durante images cannot be saved to file directly, as you pointed out previously. But Mario, to his credit, did not protest when I did a series of MS Paint I(bitmap) screen shots, presenting them as a series of images way back in 2012 (having strongly protested the bewildering absence of alternatives, STURP’s especially!).

    Let’s not mince our words: STERA and its shroud.com site have been essentially a wet blanket where Turin Linen research is concerned, seemingly having its own (commercial?) agenda, acquiring and concealing photographic data that is not its own.

    Sorry, Dan. Someone had to say it…

    • Lee Jones
      March 8, 2019 at 12:26 pm

      I agree with you regarding the STURP image data base being copyrighted. They should be available for anyone who shows an interest in sindonology. And yes Mario’s shroudscope is an awesome site, i have the original TIFF files taken by Durante, and they are a bit more revealing in detail when you zoom in. Mario converted the TIFF file to JPEG and as a result, detail gets lost in the compression process. The file that Mario uses on his shroudscope is the 2002 image taken after the restoration. The TIFF image is around 550 megabytes, and the image of just the face area is around 480 megabytes, the face only image has alot more detail than when you zoom into the image of the entire shroud. Mario said that he will be putting the images i sent him a while back in the shroudscope when he gets the time :)

  5. March 8, 2019 at 12:18 pm

    Recipient address rejected: Domain not found

    I don’t know what may be the reason of the problem…

    • Lee Jones
      March 8, 2019 at 12:27 pm

      I dont know whats going on :/ Give me your e-mail address and i will send you an E-Mail

      • March 8, 2019 at 12:35 pm

        Can we do this via Dan? I don’t want to disclose my private adress.

    • Lee Jones
      March 8, 2019 at 12:33 pm

      I can see what the problem is now. Send to this address. djleejay85@googlemail.com .. For some reason when i last gave you my address it came out with a dot in between google and mail lol. Sorry, it should work now.

      • March 8, 2019 at 12:37 pm

        Sent right now.

  6. Tersio Gorrasi
    March 8, 2019 at 3:44 pm

    Memorandum of Pierre d’Arcis, Bishop of Troyes
    To The Avignon Pope Clement VII
    Written circa 1389
    (anonymous, unsigned, undated, unsealed, rough draft)

    Translated from Latin by the Reverend Herbert Thurston
    “The Holy Shroud and The Verdict of History”
    The Month, Volume CI (101), pages 17-29, 1903

    Bibliothèque Nationale de Paris, Collection de Champagne,
    v. 134, folio 138.
    &
    Bibliothèque Nationale de Paris, Collection de Champagne,
    v. 154. folio 137.
    Memorandum “For many theologians and other wise persons declared that this could not
    be the real shroud of our Lord having the Saviour’s likeness thus imprinted
    upon it, since the holy Gospel made no mention of any such imprint, while,
    if it had been true, it was quite unlikely that the holy Evangelists
    would have omitted to record it, or that the fact should have remained”

    Replica: The fact that the Gospels did not mention an image imprinted on
    the shroud does not necessarily rule out the possibility that it existed,
    provided that it could be so tenuous at the moment, that it would be unnoticed.
    The disciples might have thought it was just normal bleeding and sweating.
    Let us also remember that the image is perceived only when viewed from
    a certain distance.

    Memorandum:”Eventually, after diligent inquiry and examination, he discovered
    the fraud and how the said cloth had been cunningly painted, the truth
    being attested by the artist who had painted it, to wit, that it was a
    work of human skill and not miraculously wrought or bestowed”.

    Replica:It is both inadmissible and paradoxical to report a fraud
    without even identify the forgerer and its consequent punishment,
    given the seriousness of the complaint, according to the memorandum. The
    image definitively is not a painting, as exhaustively mentioned by many
    researchers.

    Memorandum:”They, seeing their wickedness discovered, hid away the said cloth
    so that the Ordinary could not find it, and they kept it hidden afterwards
    Then the said Lord Cardinal, without entirely approving the petition,
    but probably acting on the facts before him and so far prudently,
    granted to the petitioner by Apostolic authority that without asking
    leave of the Ordinary or of any other person he might set up this picture
    or figure of the shroud of our Lord in the said church or in any other decent place. And under cover of this written authority the cloth was openly exhibited and shown to the people in the church aforesaid on great holidays, and frequently on feasts and at other times, with the utmost solemnity, even more than when the Body of Christ our Lord is exposed
    for thirty-four years or thereabouts down to the present year
    He, however, refusing obedience and lodging an appeal, in defiance of the
    prohibition went on with the exhibition as before”.

    Replica:If the alleged fraud had already been discovered and denounced,
    why only report the fact more than 30 years later?
    Why would exhibitors insist on relic exposition, and would many people
    believe it to be true? Why did the ecclesiastical authorities
    take no action?
    As a checkmate to the hilarious theory of image formation through flour,
    just use any image editing software, and apply the edge detect filter
    (or find edges in Adobe Photoshop) to both the positive shroud hands image and those
    produced by Colin . The difference is very, very huge!!!

  7. Hugh Farey
    March 8, 2019 at 6:03 pm

    Hi Tersio, thank you; some interesting points worth responding to.

    1) “The fact that the Gospels did not mention an image imprinted on
    the shroud does not necessarily rule out the possibility that it existed,
    provided that it could be so tenuous at the moment, that it would be unnoticed.
    The disciples might have thought it was just normal bleeding and sweating.
    Let us also remember that the image is perceived only when viewed from
    a certain distance.”

    It is not just the Gospels which should have acknowledged the existence of the image on the Shroud, had it existed. Depictions of Jesus’s shroud have been included in various themes of sacred art from the ninth or tenth century onwards, in scenes of the visitation of the holy women and the resurrection of Christ. Never once is it acknowledged that there is an image on the Shroud. If you mean that the image wasn’t noticed until the 14th century, then I’d have to say that is better evidence for a medieval than a first century provenance.

    2) “It is both inadmissible and paradoxical to report a fraud
    without even identify the forgerer and its consequent punishment,
    given the seriousness of the complaint, according to the memorandum. The
    image definitively is not a painting, as exhaustively mentioned by many
    researchers.”

    Inadmissible and paradoxical to whom? The D’Arcis memorandum is a letter from a bishop to his pope, not a formal legal process. There may have been no reason to punish the artist. Depictions of the Shroud, even imaginative ideas about images on the Shroud, were not illegal or even discouraged. It was passing them off as genuine relics which was criminal, and that was what d’Arcis was complaining about. The image may well have been a painting – but the pigment has almost entirely rubbed off. That would be why earlier commenters often describe it as being red, while now it is merely yellow-brown.

    3)a) “If the alleged fraud had already been discovered and denounced,
    why only report the fact more than 30 years later?”

    As soon as the canons of Lirey began to advertise the Shroud as a genuine relic, in about 1356, it was suppressed by the ecclesiastical authorities, and hidden away.

    3)b) “Why would exhibitors insist on relic exposition, and would many people
    believe it to be true?”

    Bishop d’Arcis was several bishops later than the first one to suppress the image, and Geoffrey de Charny II was now old enough to take his own responsibility for the Shroud. Even so, what infuriated d’Arcis was that in spite of treating the Shroud with all the veneration due to a holy relic, it was publicly only announced to be a copy.

    3)c) “Why did the ecclesiastical authorities take no action?”
    They did, rapidly and efficiently. The Shroud had to be hidden away, never to see the light of day in Lirey again.

    • March 10, 2019 at 1:13 pm

      Hello again Hugh, quick question if you dont mind, Is it possible to post image’s on these wordpress site’s ? I have only just started using it lol. I am used to IPB based website’s. I know how to attach image’s on my own post’s, but i do not know how to attach them to replie’s such as this one :/ Many thank’s

  8. eugene ray
    March 8, 2019 at 9:47 pm

    I Am Now 86 Years Old. my Brother Is Dying. I May Be The Only One Left To Know About Our Family w/ The Shroud History (STUDY MY HISTORY / REWARDS AWAIT ! BRESSE SAVOY GRUY VERGY CHARNEY) At Magny Fouchard Chateau In The Orient Forest & Saint Bernard’s Clairvaux Near Troyes & Bar sur Aube Fr. Google : Eugene Ray / (Any Of These Names)

    Eugene Ray, Architect, Prof. Emeritus, SDSU (Links To Vergy, Charney / Ray sur Soane Fr) Also Lirey (Leray) Chapel S. Of Troyes.

    >

    • Hugh Farey
      March 9, 2019 at 3:21 am

      Oh, dear, Eugene, I am sorry. I have tried to make sense of your website before, as indeed, have several other shroud historians, and we have invited you, several times, to make your ideas clearer and to provide some evidence for them. Sadly you were never able to do this. I’m afraid that in the absence of anything that might substantiate your claims, they remain among the more fanciful ideas regarding the history of the Shroud, and although I hope they will remain filed here for reference in the future, they do not currently merit serious consideration. If you are not able to clarify your ideas yourself, it would be good to speak to someone who can, so that, if they have substance, we can give them the consideration you think they deserve.

  9. March 9, 2019 at 3:08 pm

    The History I Present Leads To, Is Well Documented
    For Scholars Who Will Follow My Essays. I Am Now
    On Facebook : Eugene Ray, Architect / my Ancestor
    Bresse-Savoy Leads To The Shroud Of Turin @ the
    ON THE MAP OF TROYES REGION
    FIND LIREY, CLAIRVAUX ABBEY,
    my Orient Forest Ancestors
    VERLOIN de GRUY(ERE)
    Linked To Saint Bernard
    WERE KNIGHTS TEMPLARS @
    CHATEAU MAGNY FOUCHARD,
    Lirey (Leray) Chapel Near Troyes & >Near Magny-
    Fouchard Chateau my de Gruy(ere)Inherited From La Roche de RayTreasures Is Theremy Bresse-SavoyDisprove That Known History<!)

    • Hugh Farey
      March 9, 2019 at 4:42 pm

      I’m sorry, Eugene, but your comment means nothing to me at all. I’m sorry not to be able to support you in your endeavours. I wish you well.

      • Eugene Ray
        March 10, 2019 at 12:56 pm

        You Mean>Nothing To Me As It Is Obviousmy Bresse (Savoy) Grt Grandmother’s
        Family In Villefranche su Mer >Acquired The Turin Shroud
        By >Trading Two Castles For The Shroud Is Well Knownde Gruyere Family Link To The Vergy is Well Known !
        (my de Gruy(ere) Grandmother >Descended From Vergy<)
        Vergy-Charney Family Owned The Shroud @ Lirey Chapel
        All Of This Is Well Documented History About my Families!

        • Hugh Farey
          March 10, 2019 at 2:16 pm

          It may be obvious to you, Ray, and perhaps you have some evidence for your belief, but it is not obvious to me that that any ancestor of yours acquired the Shroud, nor what your connection is to the Vergy or Charny families. If, as you say, this is well documented, then perhaps you could say where, and we can assess your claims for ourselves.

  10. Mark Rivera
    March 9, 2019 at 3:47 pm

    Aloha Lee. Is it possible to get the best quality image (in your opinion) of just the face? If not, the whole image would be fine. Mahalo, Mark Rivera.

    Sent from my iPhone

    >

  11. Charles Hampton
    March 9, 2019 at 3:54 pm

    Email address is invalid.
    Love you Dan!
    Chuck 4693876778

    • March 10, 2019 at 7:00 am

      Hello Charles, My E-Mail address is djleejay85@googlemail.com I typed it wrong in my OP and there is no way to edit it and correct my mistake :/ Anyway you have it now, so drop me an E-Mail and we can have a chat :)

  12. Charles Hampton
    March 9, 2019 at 4:41 pm

    We must chat.
    4693876778

  13. March 9, 2019 at 6:48 pm

    My Interest Is French History Scholars.
    The Leads I Send Can Be Verified & I
    Wonder If Some Scholars Read This.?

    • Hugh Farey
      March 10, 2019 at 5:24 am

      I’m sorry, Eugene; these cryptic comments mean nothing, and by continuing to post them, my faith in whether you really have anything to say at all is diminished. I have truly done my best to make some sense of your essay “Shroud of Turin / an amazing but true family history” posted 5 June 2015 at eugenerayarchitect.blogspot.com, but apart from a list of alleged connections, it offers nothing by way of verification or sources. Being written in white on black, and studded with inappropriate spelling, punctuation and diacriticals, it looks as if it has been written deliberately to obscure the truth rather than to expose it. If you really have anything to offer Shroud scholars, in the field of French history or anything else, then I’m afraid you’ll have to do better that that.

      • PHPL
        March 10, 2019 at 6:12 am

        Hi Hugh ,
        I read your essay ” The medieval Shroud ” with great interest. Hats off for this remarkable work Mr. Farey ! Soon to be King Charles would be well inspired to kick off his reign by knighting you and Colin Berry. Sir Hugh Farey / Sir Colin Berry, that sounds good , isn’t it ?

        • March 10, 2019 at 7:07 am

          Hi PHPL, You will find that Hugh is one of the most friendly guy’s (That i have come across lol) in this group. His question’s and answers adhere to actual science and logic. We think along the same lines to be honest :p :) Hugh, i have some more image’s for you. I will drop you an inbox in a moment.

  14. March 10, 2019 at 1:09 pm

    Some of these comment’s are very confusing lol ….

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: