Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [genphoto] Digest Number 471

Expand Messages
  • Chuck Elledge
    Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 01:57:41 -0000 From: pb Subject: color correcting, etc. Greetings A lot of the old photos I have been seeing lately
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 6, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 01:57:41 -0000
      From: "pb" <plb6@...>
      Subject: color correcting, etc.

      Greetings
      A lot of the old photos I have been seeing lately on the web sites are
      of poor quality. They seemed to be scanned in and no attention is paid
      to fixing up their various flaws. Is this on purpose? Do people prefer
      the old photos to be authentic? Or do these people lack knowledge of
      basic color correction and balancing you can do with photoshop? ....

      What is the general thought on this? Leave 'em alone, or try to get
      the best picture out of what's left?

      pb


      The color casts, yellowing, dye shifts and fading in old photos are not like
      the patina present in an antique armoire's original finish. If historical
      accuracy and family history is the goal then these adulterations should be
      corrected in order to come as close as possible to the original picture as
      it was when taken. If collecting an antique photo is the goal, then leave it
      alone - these shifts and chemical changes are part of the "patina" - like
      the old armoire, any changes will lessen the value of the original. Luckily,
      with Photoshop, or one of its less expensive and easier to master brethren
      like Paint Shop Prop or PS Elements, you can have both worlds. Any
      conservationist will tell you that the original should never be altered - a
      copy should be made and that copy should be worked on. The only work done on
      the original should be to stabilize it chemically - best left to an expert
      if you really treasure your old photo or tintype/ambrotype etc. Amateur work
      on an original photo can ruin it completely. The question of which to post
      on a website is easy - BOTH. I prefer a small insert of the scanned original
      as is with a larger corrected copy. This allows comparison, gives the sense
      of age, and at the same time presents a close approximation of the photo as
      it looked new. Other changes that can be done in Photoshop or its
      equivalent, like removing phone wires, or worse, facial blemishes (the
      natural kind like moles or wrinkles), should not be done UNLESS an unaltered
      comparison is also posted. These changes, which alter the subject matter
      itself may help clarify a picture but should never be presented to a viewer
      as a bonafide copy of the original. Just my take on an interesting topic.

      Chuck Elledge
    • Golden Phoenix
      Hey thank you I did it the old fashioned way and kinda got the feeling that was the only way. but i can see how much easier it is to use the scanners and
      Message 2 of 3 , Feb 7, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Hey thank you I did it the old fashioned way and kinda
        got the feeling that was the only way. but i can see
        how much easier it is to use the scanners and
        programs. and thanks for the information on photo
        shop. being retired i wouldnt need it anymore but
        where was you 25 years ago??????? LOL Keep up the good
        knowledge passing on.
        --- Chuck Elledge <elledge@...> wrote:
        >
        > Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 01:57:41 -0000
        > From: "pb" <plb6@...>
        > Subject: color correcting, etc.
        >
        > Greetings
        > A lot of the old photos I have been seeing lately on
        > the web sites are
        > of poor quality. They seemed to be scanned in and no
        > attention is paid
        > to fixing up their various flaws. Is this on
        > purpose? Do people prefer
        > the old photos to be authentic? Or do these people
        > lack knowledge of
        > basic color correction and balancing you can do with
        > photoshop? ....
        >
        > What is the general thought on this? Leave 'em
        > alone, or try to get
        > the best picture out of what's left?
        >
        > pb
        >
        >
        > The color casts, yellowing, dye shifts and fading in
        > old photos are not like
        > the patina present in an antique armoire's original
        > finish. If historical
        > accuracy and family history is the goal then these
        > adulterations should be
        > corrected in order to come as close as possible to
        > the original picture as
        > it was when taken. If collecting an antique photo is
        > the goal, then leave it
        > alone - these shifts and chemical changes are part
        > of the "patina" - like
        > the old armoire, any changes will lessen the value
        > of the original. Luckily,
        > with Photoshop, or one of its less expensive and
        > easier to master brethren
        > like Paint Shop Prop or PS Elements, you can have
        > both worlds. Any
        > conservationist will tell you that the original
        > should never be altered - a
        > copy should be made and that copy should be worked
        > on. The only work done on
        > the original should be to stabilize it chemically -
        > best left to an expert
        > if you really treasure your old photo or
        > tintype/ambrotype etc. Amateur work
        > on an original photo can ruin it completely. The
        > question of which to post
        > on a website is easy - BOTH. I prefer a small insert
        > of the scanned original
        > as is with a larger corrected copy. This allows
        > comparison, gives the sense
        > of age, and at the same time presents a close
        > approximation of the photo as
        > it looked new. Other changes that can be done in
        > Photoshop or its
        > equivalent, like removing phone wires, or worse,
        > facial blemishes (the
        > natural kind like moles or wrinkles), should not be
        > done UNLESS an unaltered
        > comparison is also posted. These changes, which
        > alter the subject matter
        > itself may help clarify a picture but should never
        > be presented to a viewer
        > as a bonafide copy of the original. Just my take on
        > an interesting topic.
        >
        > Chuck Elledge
        >
        >
        >
        >


        __________________________________
        Do you Yahoo!?
        Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
        http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.