CLOSE UP STILL IMAGE OF END OF CROSSED LINES
(INVERTED VIEW) SHOWING MICRO WRITING
BEST VIEWED IN FULL-SCREEN SIZE
Just time for a very short description of this video. It contains additional close up views of the process of removing the super-thin layers of ink from the Somerton Man code page. It also will show you just what the ink removal fluid is. You may be surprised!
With the information supplied here, you will be able to download and print out your own copy of the code page and from there you will be able to demonstrate for yourself just how the inked cover letters can be stripped back to reveal the hidden microcodes.
Once again the instructions:
1. Download the image file either from here or from the Cipher Mysteries blog here
2. Save the file as is as a jpg file type, it is at 600 dpi as per the original from Marcello/Trish, it is also a 24-bit image
3. Set up your inkjet printer to print to at high quality and select the paper type as 'High Resolution,'
4. Use bleed proof paper, you can buy A4 size pads of bleed proof paper from most art supply shops.
5. After you have printed it out, make sure you allow plenty of time for it to dry. I normally wait 15 minutes
6. Once dried you should inspect it then you should be able to make out darker shapes behind the inked covered letters.
7. After you are sure that the print out is dry, use a small dropper to drizzle the ink removal fluid over your selected letters and lines.
8. Leave the fluid to rest for maybe 10 seconds or so, flood it off with more fluid and then soak up any excess fluid with a kitchen towel/paper towel.
I Will post still images from this video later today...
UPDATE 14th November 2020
Indented writing recovery is by no means a new science and much has been written over the years on how it was best recovered. Below are two images from an article which I read some time ago, the first image shows actual examples and the second is of text from the 5 pages, 1950 document from which the example images were obtained.
Here's the original paper information:
Gordon, I would be very interested to see the entire process re-created in full. From the very start to finish i.e. get a book from the 1940's with rough textured paper (like that appears in the image of the code page), with a separate sheet of paper over a book page (or was it the last page immediately before the back cover that was then torn out??) add some large random block letters and then some micro code within those letters. This is the tricky bit... Take a photo of the page with a large format film camera ( or glass plate negative camera), get that film or plate developed as a negitive, get a positive print on a glossy medium. To highlight the large block letters ink or paint over the larger letters wu=ith a very fine brush (the over inking needs to achieve a smooth, flowing finish)... take another picture of that inked over photo, scan it, print it on your printer and dissolve the ink on that.
ReplyDeleteWhy hasn't anyone tried this before?
Reproduce the entire process?
ReplyDeleteAnnonymous, I sort of hoped you would lave responded. Anyway the short answer is that it was discussed about 10 years ago in a Facebook group. It fell by the wayside because in the end, we already have the only original scan/image file and that's as good as it gets. If someone goes to the trouble of reproducing the process from scratch, it might make a good academic study but the number of variables that would need to be addressed such as paper type, developer chemicals, even the ink used to write over the letters would be a formidable barrier and why would you do it? If someone wanted to take it on as a project then I would contribute some time if needed but it would be a big task. It was certainly worth commenting on it.
ReplyDeleteGordon, Anonymous here. I am not a robot. Now I know I'm am being screened by the gate keeper with my previous replies.
ReplyDeleteI have always wondered why there are so few comments posted on this site, as the subject matter is interesting, thought provoking and provocative and should illicit more responses than are made public!
That's interesting, I haven't screened your replies as such. I normally read through comments before I publish them of course but I certainly haven't blocked any from you that I know of. Other sites tend to use a range of 'sock puppets' I think the term is. I don't and I try to keep on target as much as I can.
ReplyDeleteYou might know that I have a firm anti-troll policy, that keeps the numbers down although I do get high numbers of visitors from all over the world and a fair share of emails/messages. In fact this week in particular has surprised me, much higher than normal for this time of year.
I really don't block many comments. There was a problem some time ago with the comment forms making it difficult to send comments in but I thought that was fixed.
Annonymous: Thanks for the comment and here's my position on this:
ReplyDelete1. If we do as you say and reproduce exactly what was done to create the original code page and scan, then you will get exactly the same result as I have done. There are distinct micro letters and numbers on the page and within the letters. There is no process I know of that would magically create micro letters and numbers on the code page.
2. The comment/question regarding 'photograph of a photograph' is incorrect which shows a lack of understanding of how scans and photographs are created and copied. There is no detrimental effect on image quality if you photograph it and/or scan it correctly
3. At this time, I am working on a decrypt from the code page and also on 3 other documents from the SM case, each of which contain the exact same micro code along with differing concealment techniques.
I honestly see no point in repeating the research and the numerous exercises I have done on the code page and it's creation over the past 10 years so I will not be doing that. You are most certainly entitled to carry out your own research and I wish you well with it.
Anonymous. It would be incorrect to assume that no research had been done on just how the Police or whichever agency were able to recover and photograph the indented writng found on the code page. A lot of reading but, due to the absence of a lab and equipment, very basic experimentation went into that aspect of the research.
ReplyDeleteThere are a number of very good articles on the subject and amongst them I would respectfully suggest that you read this one in particular:
Restoration and Decipherment of Erasures and Obliterated or Indented Writing
Anthony Longhetti and Paul L. Kirk
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1931-1951)
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1931-1951)
Vol. 41, No. 4 (Nov. - Dec., 1950), pp. 518-522 (5 pages)
Published by: Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
I found it to be an easily understood document and with images which always helps. As stated, there are a number of other useful articles for you to read and for anyone else who may be interested, it's worth tracking down this and similar articles on the subject.
That there is micro writing on the image of the Somerton Man code page, there is no doubt. That scan along with most others, emanated from the Adelaide Advertiser sometime in the 1990s I believe when they undertook a large scale digitisation project of all their files. Then of course there is a much earlier scan which shows the same results as in the presence of micro writing. On the question as to whether there are any actual photographs of the code page dating back to 1949, I think there are a few examples around, just need a little digging to 'unearth' them so to speak.
Anonymous, I eventually received two, duplicate, comments from you. There was a localised issue with an NBN outage for a couple of days. Again with respect, there are ways of asking questions and ways of demanding attention, you might benefit from reviewing how that may be achieved by incorporating a modicum of politeness within your question... :)
I have updated this post with images and an extract from the article quoted.
We can resolve this easily. If you send your details via a comment I will not publish your identifying information. I can email you with some explanations.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, not making much headway here, you didn't include the Gmail address?
ReplyDelete