The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] Undefined variable $can_link - Line: 6 - File: showthread.php(1658) : eval()'d code PHP 8.5.12 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 157 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php(1658) : eval()'d code 6 errorHandler->error_callback
/showthread.php 1658 eval




Bad news: f116v was substantially mangled by Retracer
#19
One version of a middle ground would be that various people were working on the manuscript in a hierarchial manner, with one having the authority to amend the other's work. Father and son, teacher and student, coördinator and novice... 

Another might be that the same person noticed right away that there were problems with the ink and decided to use a better batch to fix the problematic areas. Why often the same areas, like the breasts of nymphs? I don't know, this question equally applies to all explanations. Maybe certain parts were drawn first and others were added afterwards with a fresh, better batch of ink.

Which is basically another option: higher quality ink (better? fresher?) was prepared at some point and the nature of the workflow resulted in what we have now.

It could really be any of those and a bunch more. Maybe the ink was such that it resulted in darker lines depending on angle, pressure, thickness and whatnot. Maybe it was the same scribe on the same day.

I understand that the differences in ink color are worth pointing out, but people (especially in the mailing list days, I think) have allowed their imaginations to run wild about potential causes.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Big water stain on f116v - by Jorge_Stolfi - 05-09-2025, 10:00 PM
RE: Bad news: f116v was substantially mangled by Retracer - by Koen G - 03-09-2025, 10:57 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)