The current posts about changing photos reminded me of this. Many regulars will know of my battles with a certain "one who cannot be named", from this point known as owcbn, about repairing or enhancing photographs. I was against it, of course, for many reasons such as it ruins old photos and may not show what was real at the time. I did say I was not against changing the contrast etc, but against removing objects in the photos. Owcbn did not know the difference and said so.

Below are two photos from the thread http://www.whaleybridge.net/forum/default.aspx?g=posts&t=512 The first one is the original that was sent in and the second the repaired copy. The post that came with the photo stated Had a go at repairing this one Gnatalee but there is a grain pattern in the background that can only be removed by blurring, which is OK on the sky obviously not on faces

Now my point is what exactly has been removed by blurring? Not the sky but a piece of horizontal wood we experts at football call a crossbar, it sits on two vertical pieces called goal posts and between the three of them and the ground it creates the goal mouth, with a net attached to the wood creating the net. That's the lesson over for people who know nothing about football and owcbn.

So the question is why do this? Well I think owcbn didn't know or realise, that is the danger of repairing photos, especially by amateurs. Now I doubt that in a hundred years that an historian will find the photo and say "You know in 1929 in Bugsworth they didn't use crossbars". To me it proves the point that photos should not be changed.

Norm

Edited by user 23 August 2011 19:24:17(UTC)  | Reason: Spelling

Norm attached the following image(s):

Just putting my 'twopennorth' in......for what it's worth!

I totally agree  - leave well alone. Photographs should not be messed with apart from perhaps altering contrast/brightness levels if need be. The 2nd (repaired ? that's a joke) photograph  has been badly done in my opinion - the sky does not look at all natural and appears to be done with what looks like a 'cloning' tool which is found in Adobe photoshop or similar programme - very bad! and to totally take out the crossbar beggar's belief ! The original untouched photograph captures the whole essence of the subject and is far more atmospheric.

As snoopy says ...keep up the good work Norm. Your contributions are a godsend to the forum and website in general. This is, by far, the best local history website I have ever come across and although I don't live in Whaley myself  I find it particularly informative as I do have family connections (both past and present) here.

Gail

ps have just noticed ...the so called 'repaired' photograph is missing what apears to be a building in the original - look to the left  of the tall man  (2nd from left) and you'll see what I mean.

Edited by user 24 August 2011 10:40:05(UTC)  | Reason: added ps