Joe Eszterhas

Especially when you're talking about something that you're doing.

You're making something in the 1300s.

Hundreds of years before photography is ever created.

So what are you making?

And why is it so compelling when you look at it in the negative?

And if you're talking about something that was created by an insane burst of energy, which is what the proponents of the Shroud of Turin being legitimate think.

They think it was created by this insane burst of energy on Jesus' resurrection.

I'm agnostic on it.

I have no idea whether it's real or not real, but I find it fascinating that they have no real explanation as to how it was created.

Well, like I said, at the very least, it's an insanely compelling piece of artwork.

Absolutely, absolutely.

The thing that I don't want to dismiss the possibility that it's real because I'm fascinated by just the mystery of how it was.

Can you pull up an image of the negative version of it?

There's no answers in terms of why?

No, no one has.

Yeah, when you look at the image and you realize that this is an actual negative of the original shroud, you stop and think, well, what would someone do?

If this is the negative, how would you create that as a positive?

Can you show me also the positive image of it?

What it actually looks like?

Okay, so this is one image.