Letter: Photography in the Middle Ages
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: In her claim (report, 8 March) that the Turin Shroud image was made using a camera obscura, I think that Ms Rye is making the error of assuming that because optics and light-sensitive materials were known in the Middle Ages their combination to produce the elements of photography must therefore have also been known.
If this technology was known, why use it only to make a forgery? The next obvious step would have followed: to use the negative images as subjects and so produce positive pictures as rudimentary photographs. Where are the pictures of palaces, gardens etc, from these centuries, even as negative images? Or even the historical references to such images? It is difficult to imagine how such know-how, with all its potential, if it really had existed, could ever have been lost.
R D Mannix, FRCS
Bebington, Merseyside
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments