Quote:
Originally Posted by krantzbucks
|
Indeed he did and I am very aware of it, but I don't see how in any way, shape or form whatsoever that should discredit a legitimate request to colorize an authentic, high quality image of him six years later in a completely different uniform for that team. From your earlier posts I understood that you relish a challenge. However, it is your right to decide what images you wish to work on and to what extent you wish to conform and enhance the rich tapesty of the history of what was the USA nation's National pastime.
I guess we also have a very different viewpoint of what is a challenge, I see a challenge in terms of enhancing authentic black and white images to their original color, however, I get the distinct impression you see more of a challenge in amending original images to represent an alternate view of reality by making changes to them to represent a more convenient version of particular needs rather than an expression of reality. I guess it is a reflection of current standards in terms of authenticity, but when there are literally thousands if not tens of thousands of high quality black and white baseball images out there that could be colorized I have great difficulty in seeing why that should be a priority.
To me the work of great baseball photographers like Thompson, Conlon, Burke and Brace etc. should be viewed and cherished as baseball's equivalent of the great portrait painters of history who operated before the invention of photography to give us an authentic, accurate impression of baseball history. They are baseball's equivalent to Da Vinci, Velasquez, Gainsborough, Van Dyck, etc. Their work should be revered and respected not used as a basis to contort to a different purpose than what was intended or what indeed represented reality, and similarly should be shared and available for the benefit of the baseball community not stored away in a particular individual's private collection.