To summarize the top imaging theories:
The imaging theories can be broadly grouped into naturalistic explanations (NE) and non-naturalistic/supernatural explanations (SE).
Naturalistic explanations can be subdivided into a work of an artist (NE-art) or something that would happen naturally without any involvement of an artist (NE-nature).
NE-art would involve things like painting, scorch, dye, rubbing, photograph, and bas-relief. This is the least likely since this was the conclusion of the 1978 STURP investigation:
viewtopic.php?p=1124026#p1124026
I’ve also argued there is virtual silence from the art community on the TS. Yet, the TS is the most scientifically studied artifact in human history. So, it makes no sense the TS is a work of art.
I’ve spent time on the bas-relief in several posts arguing it is not viable:
viewtopic.php?p=1113694#p1113694
viewtopic.php?p=1124310#p1124310
viewtopic.php?p=1124427#p1124427
I’ve also addressed the proto-photograph method:
viewtopic.php?p=1124231#p1124231
The top NE-nature explanation is the Maillard reaction, proposed by Ray Rogers. I’ve addressed that at:
viewtopic.php?p=1124081#p1124081
Three top SE explanations are corona/electrostatic discharge, neutron emission, and cloth collapse.
I’ve addressed the corona/electrostatic discharge:
viewtopic.php?p=1124174#p1124174
and the neutron emission:
viewtopic.php?p=1124551#p1124551
I presented the cloth collapse here:
viewtopic.php?p=1123740#p1123740
There are actually more theories than what I’ve presented, but most all the others are variations on the ones above.
There is no theory that fully explains all the features of the body image, but the one that explains the most is Jackson’s cloth collapse theory.
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1125096#p1125096