Well, I have to say I remain unconvinced! I think the blue paint is partially opaque so that it covers the brown ink rather than absorbing light reflected by it - this means that when the blue is applied thickly there is no information left for us to determine whether or not there was any brown beneath it.
f102v1 definitely does contain some hidden text though: http://www.geocities.com/jgroveuk/voynich/Column3.jpg
Some of the decoration on the columns is again suggestive of tiny text, but I still feel it is merely decoration. I'd like to be proved wrong though!
Cheers,
Jon.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan [mailto:hurychj@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 03 August 2004 15:08
> To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: VMs: Re: Inks and retouching
> Importance: Low
>
>
> Hello Jon,
>
> On my page, I did deconvolution too and got the same results
> as you (see my referenced page).
> Still, comparing with the other methods, deconvolution seems
> to remove also the areas where
> blue is over the brown, where it should leave the brown.
> That of course does reduce the brown
> text under into a series of unrecognizable spots which does
> not help us too much. We cannot
> concentrate on one method only, but do comparisons of many.
> If you take two first pictures on
> your page and magnify them for comparison, you can see my point.
>
> I based my decision on the fact that first six characters are
> all recognizable as certain numbers.
> In the case of one, two or even three, I would admit the
> coincidence, but if there is more, the
> case is worth of studying. Unfortunately, the "masker" did
> quite a good job. I added to my
> page another picture - the first one - showing the masking
> ("Y") above the one in question
> ("X"), which is clearly avoiding the decorative circles. On
> the other hand, in the area in question
> we can clearly see the vertical slashes covering almost only
> the height of symbols, leaving quite
> a large area uncovered. Now this was not coloring, it was masking.
>
> As for the size of numbers: it is almost the same height as
> some VM "letters" so there was no
> problem to write it legibly. For proper investigation, the
> size of the sample of
> course has to be large enough (but without distortion, which
> Beinecke scans allow up to the size
> I used, but not larger) . "The bumps in the vellum, lumps in
> the ink, and artefacts of the image
> compression" cannot of course be discounted, but it is
> obvious they will not effect it to such
> level as we can see. It would be rather random and would not
> certainly make up for the shape
> so close to certain numbers.
>
> As for Nick's arguments: he apparently did also only the
> deconvolution. True, there are strings
> or circles or dashes somewhere else, but that is just jumping
> to conclusion based on sheer
> similarity. As for "no reason for something to be there" -
> that's exactly what
> steganography is based on :-).
>
> I realize that if we consider there are numbers there, we
> would have to make some unwelcome
> conclusions like the one that it was really "hidden" there -
> first intentionally ( by locating it in the
> place nobody would look for it), then even masked by other
> color (maybe unintentionally, if
> the "masker" overlooked it) . The author's knowledge of
> Arabic numbers was of course
> expected long time ago and the use of steganography as well.
> And what is more important: we
> would have to admit that the VM is something more than just
> what "meets an eye", but that we
> have known all along :-).
>
> Jan
>
>
>
> ======= At 2004-08-03, 09:49:00 you wrote: =======
>
> >Here http://www.geocities.com/jgroveuk/voynich/Column2.jpg is my best
> >attempt at removing the blue paint from the column on
> f102v2, and revealing
> >the markings beneath it. Personally I'm not convinced that
> the marks are
> >numbers - they don't really look any more number-like to me
> than the marks
> >in the rows above or below the blue paint, and when you
> consider the true
> >size of the marks I think it's probable that we're just
> looking at bumps in
> >the vellum, lumps in the ink, and artefacts of the image
> compression. But
> >YMMV!
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Jon.
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list
>