3D analysis reveals Shroud of Turin image likely came from sculpture, not Jesus body

[Athetotheist]

Here's the latest:
https://archaeologymag.com/2025/08/shro ... sculpture/

[otseng]

Can you rename the topic to the title of the article rather than just "Latest development"?

As for the 3D analysis article, Roberto Cardinal Repole, Archbishop of Turin, Pontifical Custodian of the Shroud, responded with:

https://www.sindone.it/2025/comunicato-stampa-moraes

CISS - PRESS RELEASE C. MORAES
August 4, 2025

*Communication from the Pontifical Custodian of the Shroud*

Once again, we witness the launch of new "revelations" about the Shroud and its mysteries. Today, the hypothesis is that the Shroud was stretched not over a human corpse but over an artificial "model" that reproduces the image's characteristics.

The Custodian of the Shroud has no reason to comment on the hypotheses freely formulated by more or less accredited scientists. The International Center for Shroud Studies in Turin, which by statute provides scientific support to the Custodian, has published a document that analyzes in detail the method and results of this "discovery."

While one shouldn't be overly surprised by the outcry that certain "news""true or plausible, new or dated"can generate in a media circuit that has become global and instantaneous, there remains concern about the superficiality of certain conclusions, which often fail to withstand closer scrutiny of the work presented. And it remains important to reiterate the call to never lose sight of the necessary critical attention to what is so easily published.

+ Roberto Cardinal Repole
Archbishop of Turin, Bishop of Susa
Pontifical Custodian of the Shroud

INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR STUDIES ON THE SHROUD

*Analysis of the article Image formation on the Holy Shroud " A digital 3D approach by Cicero Moraes*

August 2025

The author created 3D models of a human body and a bas-relief, using open-source software and physics simulations to analyze the contact points of a shroud with the surfaces. The results indicate that the contact points between the shroud and the bas-relief correspond to a less deformed image than the contact points with a three-dimensional body, as the latter generates the so-called Mask of Agamemnon deformation effect, well-known in the literature. In other words, in Figure 6 of the article, the author confirms a result known since the early studies of Vignon and Delage in 1902, according to which the Shroud image is configured as an orthogonal projection. There is nothing new in this conclusion of the article.

Furthermore, starting from the in situ studies of the STuRP group (1978) and from the subsequent chemical-physical analyses, the formation of the image by means of painting, frottage with bas-relief, or contact with a heated statue/bas-relief has been excluded.

In summary, the result of the article in question regarding the absence of the Mask of Agamemnon effect and the relative vertical projection of the Shroud image has been known for over a century, and the consequence hypothesized by the author regarding the pictorial or singed origin of the Shroud from contact with a bas-relief is largely refuted by numerous physical-chemical studies, primarily STuRP and confirmed by more recent measurements, of which there is ample literature in accredited scientific journals.

The International Center for Shroud Studies (CISS) reiterates the importance of a rigorous, interdisciplinary approach that clearly distinguishes between established data and hypotheses, integrating the findings of all disciplines involved.

In-depth analysis

The tools and formats used in this article are among those commonly used in 3D modeling. Blender, for example, is a reliable software for multimedia and entertainment production, but it is not specifically designed for scientific purposes. The physics engine used to simulate the behavior of the cloth on the three-dimensional model operates according to models that imitate gravity and the adaptation of the fabric to a surface, represented by the 3D body.

This setting assumes that the cloth has been placed over the body, but the digital model does not include a support surface: there is nothing underneath the body, as if it were suspended in space. This condition influences the simulated behavior of the cloth and does not correspond to a real physical context. The inclusion of a rigid surface for the body to rest on would have significantly altered the result.

The "OrtoOnBlender" tool, used to generate the bas-relief, is described by the author as central to the process. Previous experiments (Balossino-Rabellino) with similar technologies have shown results sensitive to the properties of the simulated tissue, varying from "rigid" to "soft" behavior based on the parameters set. The replicability of a procedure is a necessary but not sufficient condition to validate its accuracy: an aspect the article emphasizes, but which in itself does not guarantee the scientific validity of the conclusions.

These types of simulations, while interesting and potentially effective in popular or multimedia contexts, present significant difficulties in being considered scientific proof, let alone conclusive.

The proposed discussion addresses a well-known and still open topic: the nature of the projection of the Shroud image. The shift from a cylindrical projection (the cloth wrapped around the body, with inevitable lateral deformations, absent on the cloth) to an orthogonal one (vertical transfer of details, with minimal distortions, but unable to explain the presence of the image in the non-contacting parts) has significant implications for the hypotheses of its formation. Digital models can contribute to this reflection, but they are no substitute for physical and chemical analysis of the artifact, which has so far ruled out the image's compatibility with pictorial methods, contact with bas-relief, or scorching from hot bas-relief.

From a methodological point of view, the CISS considers it fundamental:

The rigorous distinction between proven data and hypotheses, avoiding presenting certain statements as unproven.

Interdisciplinary collaboration, which integrates and respects the results of all disciplines involved, avoiding partial or sectoral interpretations.

As Nobel Prize winner Richard Feynman recalled:

When you conduct an experiment, you must report everything that might invalidate it, and not just what seems correct, as well as the other causes that could give rise to the same results. You must report all the points overcome by previous experiments, and what new happened, and how, and make sure that everyone can understand it You must make sure that the phenomena the theory explains are not just the ones that gave you the original idea: the theory, once completed, must also fit other phenomena.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to otseng in post #2]

As Nobel Prize winner Richard Feynman recalled:

When you conduct an experiment, you must report everything that might invalidate it, and not just what seems correct, as well as the other causes that could give rise to the same results. You must report all the points overcome by previous experiments, and what new happened, and how, and make sure that everyone can understand it You must make sure that the phenomena the theory explains are not just the ones that gave you the original idea: the theory, once completed, must also fit other phenomena.

Here again, we run into the problem of the absence of lateral distortion in the image. Vertical transfer of detail can be suggested, but not accounted for. And it would be strange for the image to be put on the cloth by some extraordinary means, but in a way which makes the image look like it was created more for aesthetics than for realism. To put it another way, the absence of realistic lateral distortion doesn't fit the hypothesis that the image had some extraordinary origin.

[otseng]

Here again, we run into the problem of the absence of lateral distortion in the image. Vertical transfer of detail can be suggested, but not accounted for.

The fact there's lack of the Agamemnon Mask effect only shows the image could not have been formed through cloth contact of a human body. But no Shroud scholar have been proposing that. So, it's a straw man refutation. As you noted, only mechanisms of vertical transfer of the image have been proposed.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to otseng in post #4]

As you noted, only mechanisms of vertical transfer of the image have been proposed.

What vertical transfer mechanism would there be? Vertical image transfer is proposed out of sheer expedience in a weak attempt to explain the absence of lateral image transfer. The problem is that there's no logical reason to assume that exclusively vertical transfer would be likely.

[otseng]

What vertical transfer mechanism would there be? Vertical image transfer is proposed out of sheer expedience in a weak attempt to explain the absence of lateral image transfer. The problem is that there's no logical reason to assume that exclusively vertical transfer would be likely.

So, what evidence is there that there is any horizontal image transfer from body to the cloth? The only evidence of horizontal transfer is the blood, but no horizontal image transfer.

As for the mechanism of vertical image transfer, there's only two possible explanations. Either information from the body was transferred vertically to the cloth (radiation) or the cloth collapsed vertically and interacted with the body (cloth collapse). What other possibilities are there?

[otseng]

Shroud of Turin debunked? Not even close " here's the truth
Jeremiah J. Johnston
August 05, 2025

The media loves a good 'gotcha' moment. Too bad this one collapses under the weight of real evidence.

Once again, the Shroud of Turin is making headlines, this time with bold claims such as The Shroud of Turin was not laid on Jesus body, scientists reveal and Shroud of Turin didnt wrap Jesus crucified body " it was just art, new research claims.

These sensationalized assertions are based on a recent article published in Archaeometry, in which Cicero Moraes, an accomplished digital modeler, used visually intriguing 3D simulations to argue that the Shroud image could not have been formed on a full human body, but rather by contact with a low-relief sculpture.

While the media delights in a provocative debunking narrative, Moraes study is not a scientific breakthrough. In fact, it recycles long-discredited assumptions.

His central thesis " that the Shroud is a contact imprint " is not demonstrated but simply presumed. Using 3D software, he simulates what a cloth might look like when draped over both a full 3D form and a shallow bas-relief. He then concludes " predictably " that the bas-relief result more closely resembles the Shroud. But this is not new insight. Its a tautology.

When you begin with a flawed assumption, your conclusion naturally mirrors it. This isnt discovery " its circular logic.

More importantly, Moraes fails to engage with decades of rigorous image analysis and physical testing that demonstrate the Shroud image is not consistent with contact imprinting, artistic rendering, or any known medieval method. The Shrouds image is anatomically precise, encoded with three-dimensional information, and limited to the topmost surface fibrils of the linen " not soaked or pressed through as one would expect from a contact transfer.

Moreover, Moraes approach ignores decades of serious scientific work, especially findings that deeply challenge any contact-based theory. The Shroud image is not the product of direct contact. It is far too subtle, too topographically accurate, and too spatially encoded for that.

Last week, I had the privilege of serving as a keynote speaker at the International Shroud of Turin Conference in St. Louis, where I met with Dr. John Jackson, one of the original physicists who led the 1978 STURP investigation and co-author of the landmark 1984 Applied Optics study on image formation.

The evidence he and his team uncovered stands in sharp contrast to the assumptions Moraes recycles.

Consider the groundbreaking VP-8 Image Analyzer work done in 1976 by Captains (and physicists) John Jackson and Eric Jumper, U.S. Air Force scientists. This analog image analysis device, developed for nuclear weapons laboratories in New Mexico, was designed to detect spatial relationships in radiographic imagery. Additionally, the VP-8 Image Analyzer was developed and used by U.S. military weapons laboratories, specifically for analyzing high-energy radiographic and photographic data, including images of atomic bomb tests.

When Jackson and Jumper input a photograph of the Shroud into the VP-8, the machine generated a three-dimensional relief of a human body.

https://www.theblaze.com/align/shroud-o ... -the-truth

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to otseng in post #6]

So, what evidence is there that there is any horizontal image transfer from body to the cloth? The only evidence of horizontal transfer is the blood, but no horizontal image transfer.

That's not what I'm arguing. I'm pointing out that there isn't any horizontal image transfer, and the point is that there should be if the cloth covered a 3-dimensional body.

As for the mechanism of vertical image transfer, there's only two possible explanations. Either information from the body was transferred vertically to the cloth (radiation)

This is a simple tautology.

or the cloth collapsed vertically and interacted with the body (cloth collapse).

This speculation proceeds from the presumption that the body simply vanished. It wouldn't work anyway, because vertial imaging on "cloth collapse" would overlay the detail from the successive layers of the body through which the cloth collapsed and the resulting image on the cloth would be a featureless blur.

What other possibilities are there?

There's the most likely possibility----that the image was taken from a relief rendering and that there isn't any horizontal image transfer because there simply wasn't a full 3-dimensional form for horizontal detail to be transferred from.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to otseng in post #6]

"Overall, we rate The Blaze strongly Right Biased and Questionable based on the promotion of conspiracy theories and numerous failed fact checks."

The Blaze - Bias and Credibility - Media Bias/Fact Check https://share.google/PpyqBeHDwIf1T9BkL

[otseng]

That's not what I'm arguing. I'm pointing out that there isn't any horizontal image transfer, and the point is that there should be if the cloth covered a 3-dimensional body.

Right, I'm agreeing there is no horizontal image transfer. There should be horizontal image transfer only if the image is produced by the cloth directly touching an actual body. As I already stated, no Shroud scholar is proposing this, so it's a straw man attack.

or the cloth collapsed vertically and interacted with the body (cloth collapse).

This speculation proceeds from the presumption that the body simply vanished.

What we have is the evidence there is only vertical imaging. And then we propose what is the most reasonable explanation to account for all the evidence.

It wouldn't work anyway, because vertial imaging on "cloth collapse" would overlay the detail from the successive layers of the body through which the cloth collapsed and the resulting image on the cloth would be a featureless blur.

The cloth collapse theory is more detailed than you're describing it. Since we do not see a featureless blur, it's evidence the body disappeared while the cloth was collapsing. I've given more details in Cloth collapse theory.

There's the most likely possibility----that the image was taken from a relief rendering and that there isn't any horizontal image transfer because there simply wasn't a full 3-dimensional form for horizontal detail to be transferred from.

That's not likely because there are so many features of the Shroud imagin that are not explained - photonegativity, 3-D properties, superficial discoloring of the top 2-3 fibers of a thread, fibers discolored next to those not discolored, no evidence of any pigment/stain/dye, and no evidence of any rubbing. And these are just the features of the image. Nothing explains all the other features of the Shroud - blood, cloth, pollen, etc.

If anyone is going to claim how the Shroud was created by an artist, one cannot just point to single argument and then make such a conclusion. Even the author admits, "The study does not address physical or chemical aspects related to the formation of the image, such as the presence of pigments, microscopic analysis, or the properties of the fabric materials. Nor does it investigate the dynamics of bodily fluids, such as blood flow."