Eventually, after diligent inquiry and examination, he [Henri de Poitiers] discovered how the said cloth had been cunningly painted, the truth being attested by the artist, who painted it, to wit, that it was a work of human skill and not miraculously wrought …it would be quite unlikely the Holy Evangelists would have omitted to record an imprint on Christ’s burial linens or that the fact should have remained hidden until the present time.
Later in the 90s contamination between male and female DNA was documented on the shroud; with male DNA being more noticeable.
However, he question of the mixture of male and female DNA could of course easily be considered null and void since the fondling and handling of the shroud (kissing) would easily explain the contamination of the blood imprinted on or used to create the image on the shroud.
Although contested by some fellow archaeologists, this publication of the findings obviously fired the imaginations of more than a billion people.
However, in 1988 a number of radiocarbon measurements were carried out by three independent laboratories, resulting in a calendar range of AD 1260 -1390, with a 95 % confidence, thus arguably providing evidence for a Medieval origin of the Turin shroud.
Following this, another possibility would be to perform so-called next generation DNA-sequencing method.
This would be especially interesting since it might identify the mitochondrial DNA of the blood, which has a very high mutation rate, making it a marker, which can be used to uniquely identify a specific human being and his and hers close maternal relations. See also the overview of the debate evolved in this particular debate in Wikipedia: Radiocarbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin  Blood Stains of the Turin Shroud 2015: beyond personal hopes and limitations of techniques By Giovanni Di Minno, Rosanna Scala, Itala Ventre and Giovanni de Gaetano In: Internal Emergency Medicine 2016, vol.
Already in 1389, Pierre d’Arcis, the Bishop of Troyes tried to stop the Avignon Pope, Clement VII to exhibit the Shroud of Turin at Lirey.
In his memorandum from 1389 (quoted above) he famously raised doubts as to the veracity of the claims of its authenticity; concerns, which he shared with his predecessor, Henri de Poitiers.
Another feature was the find of microscopic fibres of cotton, indicating that it had been woven on a loom used for weaving cotton.
Further, the thread had been spun by hand indicating a production of the cloth ante c. This – and much more evidence – led to the famous conclusion reached by Meacham in 1983, by which the authenticity of the shroud of Turin was deemed to be highly probable.
Later in the 1980s the Turin Research project continued the work, which resulted in the seminal article by William Meacham in Current Anthropology in 1983.