Editing Our Lady of Guadalupe (section)

====Flores Gómez====
Art restorer José Antonio Flores Gómez was hired by the abbot of the basilica to work on the image in 1947 and 1973. In a 2002 interview with the magazine ''[[Proceso (magazine)|Proceso]]'', he spoke about his experience. He noted that he had not been required to keep silent about his work, but had done so of his own accord.<ref name="Gomez interview">{{cite magazine |last1=Vera |first1=Rodrigo |title=Un restaurador de la guadalupana expone detalles técnicos que desmitifican a la imagen |trans-title=A restorer of the Guadalupana exposes technical details that demystify the image |magazine=[[Proceso (magazine)|Proceso]] |issue=1343 |date=July 27, 2002 |url=https://www.proceso.com.mx/187951/un-restaurador-de-la-guadalupana-expone-detalles-tecnicos-que-desmitifican-a-la-imagen |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161213172733/https://www.proceso.com.mx/187951/un-restaurador-de-la-guadalupana-expone-detalles-tecnicos-que-desmitifican-a-la-imagen |archive-date=December 13, 2016 |language=es}}</ref>

When he examined the image in 1947, he saw a large crack in the paint running vertically through the middle of the image, as well as some smaller horizontal cracks, which he thought were caused by the image having been folded. He also saw signs that others had touched up the image at various points. The necessity of touching up the image convinced him that it was of human origin.<ref name="Gomez interview"/>

Like others, Flores Gómez noted the softness of the ''tilma'', which seemed to him more like cotton than the rougher agave traditionally claimed. He also said that the paints used in the image came from natural pigments, such as from the [[cochineal]].<ref name="Gomez interview"/>