- This topic has 10 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Really nice pics wet. Funny that after all these years pictures dont look any better now than they did back then!
I’m trying to work out how these were done. I’m guessing black n white pics have been coloured and had pretty harsh sharpening filters applied to make them so crisp? Some of them look really good but others just seem a bit to unnatural. Either way its still pretty cool.
@Gary Goat wrote:
I’m trying to work out how these were done. I’m guessing black n white pics have been coloured and had pretty harsh sharpening filters applied to make them so crisp? Some of them look really good but others just seem a bit to unnatural. Either way its still pretty cool.
I dont think that is colour touch ups – way too detailed (happy to be proved wrong). You do realise they had colour photography then right? in fact it made great technological leaps in the war years.
@xdc the doc wrote:
@Gary Goat wrote:
I’m trying to work out how these were done. I’m guessing black n white pics have been coloured and had pretty harsh sharpening filters applied to make them so crisp? Some of them look really good but others just seem a bit to unnatural. Either way its still pretty cool.
I dont think that is colour touch ups – way too detailed (happy to be proved wrong). You do realise they had colour photography then right? in fact it made great technological leaps in the war years.
Yeah they had colour photography and even colour video but it wasn’t to the quality shown in them pictures as far as I know? Some of them just don’t look quite right, especially on the skin tones but others look fine. Maybe they were from a film role that was found in an archive somewhere and developed with modern methods? After 70 years there’s no fading or signs of wear anywhere. They are just too pristine
@Alzir wrote:
They had colour photo’s Doc, but not photoshop,
LOL thanks Matt.
Maybe I am not making myself clear. There is a painstaking process (that Goat referred to) where you can take black and white photos (or even videos if you have a lot of time and money) and applying colour filters to them to ‘make up’ what a colour photo of that scene may have looked like.
I just opined that the colour in these was too subtle to have been done this way (I’m no expert though). i just thought that these were old colour negs that they have digitally scanned (and yeah – no doubt sharpened and enhanced a bit in photoshop).
Partly what I was saying was that you actually get fantastic pic resolution from old fashioned print photography and sometimes you feel like we have been racing to stand still with the digital revolution. It seemed like for years digital pics were improving all the time… but they were still not as good as the old fashioned way of doing them.
I was just jesting doc, don’t worry 🙂
I agree with what you’re saying re colour etc though that’s coming from a laymans perspective. Obviously digital has to be better since that’s what spy satellites use, but for the likes of us, I guess it’s more a question of practicality.
I take you you do realise those pictures are also stitching together some famous photos to create a new scene rather than just tampering with the colour?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.