If the object in front of the eye sends its image to the eye, the
eye, on the other hand, sends its image to the object, and no
portion whatever of the object is lost in the images it throws off,
for any reason either in the eye or the object. Therefore we may
rather believe it to be the nature and potency of our luminous
atmosphere which absorbs the images of the objects existing in it,
than the nature of the objects, to send their images through the
air. If the object opposite to the eye were to send its image to the
eye, the eye would have to do the same to the object, whence it
might seem that these images were an emanation. But, if so, it would
be necessary [to admit] that every object became rapidly smaller;
because each object appears by its images in the surrounding
atmosphere. That is: the whole object in the whole atmosphere, and
in each part; and all the objects in the whole atmosphere and all of
them in each part; speaking of that atmosphere which is able to
contain in itself the straight and radiating lines of the images
projected by the objects. From this it seems necessary to admit that
it is in the nature of the atmosphere, which subsists between the
objects, and which attracts the images of things to itself like a
loadstone, being placed between them.

PROVE HOW ALL OBJECTS, PLACED IN ONE POSITION, ARE ALL EVERYWHERE
AND ALL IN EACH PART.

I say that if the front of a building--or any open piazza or
field--which is illuminated by the sun has a dwelling opposite to
it, and if, in the front which does not face the sun, you make a
small round hole, all the illuminated objects will project their
images through that hole and be visible inside the dwelling on the
opposite wall which may be made white; and there, in fact, they will
be upside down, and if you make similar openings in several places
in the same wall you will have the same result from each. Hence the
images of the illuminated objects are all everywhere on this wall
and all in each minutest part of it. The reason, as we clearly know,
is that this hole must admit some light to the said dwelling, and
the light admitted by it is derived from one or many luminous
bodies. If these bodies are of various colours and shapes the rays
forming the images are of various colours and shapes, and so will
the representations be on the wall.

[Footnote: 70. 15--23. This section has already been published in the
"_Saggio delle Opere di Leonardo da Vinci_" Milan 1872, pp. 13, 14.
G. Govi observes upon it, that Leonardo is not to be regarded as the
inventor of the Camera obscura, but that he was the first to explain
by it the structure of the eye. An account of the Camera obscura
first occurs in CESARE CESARINI's Italian version of Vitruvius, pub.
1523, four years after Leonardo's death. Cesarini expressly names
Benedettino Don Papnutio as the inventor of the Camera obscura. In
his explanation of the function of the eye by a comparison with the
Camera obscura Leonardo was the precursor of G. CARDANO, Professor
of Medicine at Bologna (died 1576) and it appears highly probable
that this is, in fact, the very discovery which Leonardo ascribes to
himself in section 21 without giving any further details.]