Using modern techniques and filters in restoration

[loord74]

I really want to know the opinion of the participants here about the usefulness of using modern technologies in restoration.

[Treetotal]

Hi Rami, Thanks for raising this as it is important to my personal involvement as a restorer here for over 17 years.
I have seen a lot of changes and advances in technology regarding the manipulation of photos on here.
It is a subject that is close to my heart and it saddens me to see historical photos restored to such extreme lengths that the results produce an image that could have been taken yesterday. Sometimes, less is more. I aim to make any restorations that I carry out, true to the era that they were taken.
I was once asked to remove a cigarette from a 1950s photo for someone, and pointed out that, that would have been the trend at that time, so I did two versions, one with and one without the cigarette .Future generations need authenticity for their historical photos in my opinion.
But each to his own. I have resisted restoring for some time now as the results that are being posted would make any of my offerings look inferior.
Carol

[loord74]

Thank you Carol for this contribution. I strongly agree with you on the necessity of preserving the historical sequence of restored images. I often go back to watch the restoration that I was doing here years ago, to really make sure of the development of the technologies that we are witnessing now. I strongly admit that sometimes there is no alternative to use these technologies to compensate for missing parts or to make them appear more accurate. Also, overusing them may lead to creation rather than restoration. Perhaps fair use and minimalism may lead to desirable results. All appreciation, Carol.

[Raybistre]

I totally agree with using what is available to restore old photographs. I stress restoring, a lot of old photos are in a very poor state of preservation. I am not too sure about some of the "improvements" where the subject has been improved possibly a little too much. Its hard to tell really because a photograph freezes the subject in that split second of time. Could be a bad photo of the subject or a good photo, unless you knew the subject you can't tell. Sorry for rambling on. I do think that the work on photo improvement I've seen on here is very, very good. I've done a couple of my damaged photos for my own amusement and have been reasonably happy with the results but I'm sure they could be better.
Ray

[loord74]

Ray
An important points You have raised were the poor preservation of images and the inability to identify what is missing inside it. To address these points, the option of using modern technologies will solve problems to a very satisfactory extent.

[Treetotal]

I agree with Ray's comment too.
Carol

[Wiggy]

Agree with your thoughts, Carol.

I don't like the 'over-cooked' photos - as you say, they lose their historic 'feeling'.
  Sometimes using the modern techniques seem to change the photo so much it is hard to recognise the original person.

Wiggy.

[Gadget]

There have been a number of threads on this topic over the last year or so, so I'm not sure why this has come up yet again.

One example that is worth reading is

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=877762.0


Gadget
 

[loord74]

There have been a number of threads on this topic over the last year or so, so I'm not sure why this has come up yet again.

One example that is worth reading is

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=877762.0


Gadget

This topic is a referendum and a vote, with the goal of letting those who use modern technologies and filters in the restoration process know whether they are welcomed by users here, or whether they are rejected. Based on the results of the vote, many matters will be judged.