It is a negative photo. If you look closely, in the lower left corner there is something that looks like a table, on which the shroud was standing.
diego_pmc (
talk)
05:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oh, didn't understand at first, sorry. It most probably is a photo of the original, as for some reason an exact replica can't be made, especially one that would have the property of being clearer in negatives. At least that's what they said in a documentary.
diego_pmc (
talk)
21:05, 14 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks. I dont know much about it except that there is a replica on display to the public (thought I could be off there too) which is why I was asking. --
Uncle Bungle (
talk)
21:25, 15 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I don't feel comfortable supporting an image for which there is no source information. How can we be sure of the copyright status? I know what you're thinking: You can't copyright something 2000 years old. However, how do we know that the image hasn't been heavily modified or edited, thus creating a new copyright on the image?
Kaldari (
talk)
23:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)reply
It is a negative photo. If you look closely, in the lower left corner there is something that looks like a table, on which the shroud was standing.
diego_pmc (
talk)
05:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oh, didn't understand at first, sorry. It most probably is a photo of the original, as for some reason an exact replica can't be made, especially one that would have the property of being clearer in negatives. At least that's what they said in a documentary.
diego_pmc (
talk)
21:05, 14 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks. I dont know much about it except that there is a replica on display to the public (thought I could be off there too) which is why I was asking. --
Uncle Bungle (
talk)
21:25, 15 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I don't feel comfortable supporting an image for which there is no source information. How can we be sure of the copyright status? I know what you're thinking: You can't copyright something 2000 years old. However, how do we know that the image hasn't been heavily modified or edited, thus creating a new copyright on the image?
Kaldari (
talk)
23:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)reply