Colorize old photos for free at My Heritage this month

You know, I was wondering the same thing. At first I thought it might be some kind of plants that were being dried for next season’s seeds or something (but that would not be done in the open). But I see now how it looks like it might be growing from the ground. I did not notice that before you mentioned it.

I think I might take a Google journey and see if I can find out what those things are for!!
Maybe its Grapes or Muscadines?
 
MC.jpg


MC-Colorized.jpg


Some of these come out great, others are a little meh, lol.
 
Last edited:
Though an Art graduate myself I'm not a fan. This is visual myth-making, after all. Colorization, no matter how "convincing," is a fabrication which adds nothing useful to our knowledge of history. Notice how groups of people in most colorized photos have nearly the same hue of skin and clothes. It doesn't take an Art major to realize how faky that is, like, what's the point?

That's not to say I don't appreciate that it's become a highly-entertaining fad, that it perhaps helps to fill in-place directive days at home. My caveat is that some years into the future this activity will have been at the expense of scholars evaluating authentically-tinted period images.

I've engaged in the practice myself so am somewhat hypocritical here, but I at least limit my application of it to obvious promotional purposes that will never be mistaken for any sort of reliable history by anyone.

Thoughts? Is it "wet blanket...lighten up son" for me?
I think you raise a good point @byron ed, though I'm neither an artist, photographer, nor historian. Accuracy and historical veracity shouldn't be deliberately compromised by any means, so my hope is that there are significant enough differences in colorized photos versus hand-colored photos for historians, and maybe even casual viewers like me, to tell them apart. For instance, I've wondered, just as you have, about the way everyone in colorized group photos has the same skin tone. Uniforms, too, seem to be exactly the same hue, only the depth or intensity of color being adjusted for light and shading. Do you think these or other qualities of colorized photos might be sufficient to tip off knowledgeable researchers?
 
...Do you think these or other qualities of colorized photos might be sufficient to tip off knowledgeable researchers?

Yes,* but that's to be a bit dismissive of the the much larger metric of all viewers. Surely this is only a minor concern. It's nothing that you or I can affect, but that doesn't mean we have to be fans of the fad here.

Colorized images are related to Civil War history but they are not Civil War history, that's all. I'd not have any caveats in response to these images being posted on an art or photography forum. And it's not as if the topic of colorization should be dis-allowed here. We talk about commemorative badges, desserts and monuments after all.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*When it comes right down to it FBI labs etc. can detect even the most minimal of digital manipulations so there's no danger at all of these ever being used for anything more than petty deceptions (one of the reasons why direct-to-film negatives or slides are often the only things accepted as proofs in court cases).
 
Last edited:
The colorization seems too limited. To wit, if I were to put my avatar in there, I bet everyone would look the same although the trousers and coats worn by the officers had different hues and tints. Likewise with the skin tones. Same with the hair and beards. Whose to say one was a redhead with a dark brown beard? Is there a way that you can custom colorize each subject in the image?
 
Though an Art graduate myself I'm not a fan. This is visual myth-making, after all. Colorization, no matter how "convincing," is a fabrication which adds nothing useful to our knowledge of history. Notice how groups of people in most colorized photos have nearly the same hue of skin and clothes. It doesn't take an Art major to realize how faky that is, like, what's the point?

That's not to say I don't appreciate that it's become a highly-entertaining fad, that it perhaps helps to fill in-place directive days at home. My caveat is that some years into the future this activity will have been at the expense of scholars evaluating authentically-tinted period images.

I've engaged in the practice myself so am somewhat hypocritical here, but I at least limit my application of it to obvious promotional purposes that will never be mistaken for any sort of reliable history by anyone.

Thoughts? Is it "wet blanket...lighten up son" for me?
I hear you man, I wish we could see what the real colors were, this is the closest thing, lol.
 
Though an Art graduate myself I'm not a fan. This is visual myth-making, after all. Colorization, no matter how "convincing," is a fabrication which adds nothing useful to our knowledge of history. Notice how groups of people in most colorized photos have nearly the same hue of skin and clothes. It doesn't take an Art major to realize how faky that is, like, what's the point?

That's not to say I don't appreciate that it's become a highly-entertaining fad, that it perhaps helps to fill in-place directive days at home. My caveat is that some years into the future this activity will have been at the expense of scholars evaluating authentically-tinted period images.

I've engaged in the practice myself so am somewhat hypocritical here, but I at least limit my application of it to obvious promotional purposes that will never be mistaken for any sort of reliable history by anyone.

Thoughts? Is it "wet blanket...lighten up son" for me?
I agree .To do this alters the sene and the more the mood of the scene as seen by the photographer,To highlight the picture ,esp. if they have faded so much that the photo is not recognizable then this process can save these pictures.This colorizing a photo is like taking a black and white movie and doing this ,This would take away the art of the film by removing the work of the cameraman and director in the use of shade and lights on scenes that they want to depict which would cause the emotion they strive for.Can you imagine the dead of battle in color ,what emotion would that cause ?
 
Last edited:
Yes,* but that's to be a bit dismissive of the the much larger metric of all viewers. Surely this is only a minor concern. It's nothing that you or I can affect, but that doesn't mean we have to be fans of the fad here.

Colorized images are related to Civil War history but they are not Civil War history, that's all. I'd not have any caveats in response to these images being posted on an art or photography forum. And it's not as if the topic of colorization should be dis-allowed here. We talk about commemorative badges, desserts and monuments after all.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*When it comes right down to it FBI labs etc. can detect even the most minimal of digital manipulations so there's no danger at all of these ever being used for anything more than petty deceptions (one of the reasons why direct-to-film negatives or slides are often the only things accepted as proofs in court cases).
I understand the point you are making, due to you being blessed with a professional eye. My brain must compare and contrast certain features differently for many times I cannot see the details in front of me until pointed out. By colorization, I have found a certain depth of perception that allows me a better reference, bringing in the contrasting shadows with the light. I can see and make out features that remained invisible to me at some point before. To me personally, it is a worthy practice.
I might add that it is easier for me to follow a doctoral thesis than a masters' due to the focus on the topic. I can barely read a high school level, being way too bland or obsessively expressive. [Edit]. And that being even with perfect spelling, punctuation, and syntax.
Thanks for allowing 'my point of view'.
Lubliner.
 
Last edited:
I got to playing with colorization with pictures of Arkansas soldiers.

This one is a bit more famous, I really wish I could have did better.
Enhanced Ark. 2.jpg


But this one turned out alright.
Enhaced Ark. 4.jpg


Just have to enhance the photos some to get better results. Takes a lot tries...

EDIT- The last gents look to be dressed in Little Rock Depot frock coats that came in butternut and gray, (specifically a darkish-gray wool on brown cotton jean when gray), and the gray in the photo looks good, but no where close to actual color.
 
Back
Top