Hi everyone, hope you're well. Towards the end of last year I colourised a set of my Grandad's photos from when he was in Burma and India with the 1st Bn Kings (Liverpool). I've just published a new blog on my personal site where you can compare the coloured photos to the originals - I hope you like it Colourising my Grandad's WW2 photos from Burma and India Paul
I used a site called ColouriseSG to colourise the photos, but unfortunately it's no longer active. There are a few alternatives, but most are paid for services. There is a good app on Apple called "Colorize - Color to Old Photos", and you get 5 photos free in a trial - that's worth a look.
They still exist, Paul... same name but a .com at the end... there are a lot of packages out there and several try-b4u-buy options... It is an option in Photoshop but like everything in that beast it is designed for the "pro's" of this game...
I'm not a fan of colourising old photos . Alot of colourised photos look like they were done with these.
I'm not a fan at all either of colourised photos. If pictures were shot in black and white, they should stay like that. Also I think the detail is a bit blurred in the colourised ones. Of course, just my opinion
Here's a thought for you on the classic "black and white" image... if the preference is leaving b&w just that, what about the classic sepia-toned images caused by the degradation of the original image... they contain reds and yellows, and well as grey-tones... now, do you just restore the "damage" (scratches, tears, etc) or do you go the full package and restore back to true grey-tone "black and white"...? If I'm doing that, I do tend to wipe out any colour, including the sepia... What image is more "true" to the original...? Discuss... or not...
I can't believe I missed that! I'd been using the Singapore version of that site - for some reason! Thanks
Hand tinting was not to unusual back in the day... I only have one of my mother taken some time during WW2... not war related...
True Sepia toning doesn't come from image degradation. It's an archival technique (and to an extent, artistic, though maybe more usually as a side effect in earlier examples), that enhances the longevity of the print. 'Sepia' pictures left the final bath that colour, and don't fade as fast as un-treated silver halide. Yellowing & other effects on old non-sepia pictures is a function of 'bad' storage, where light, moisture etc. has got to the print. Look at even hundred year old true monochrome prints that have been kept in acid free darkness, and they're still distinctly Black & White. Tints you say! I've a few old sets. Sometimes wonder if I should have a go... Though I'm a brush-licker, so don't really trust myself with whatever the F is in some of these little jars. Some early tinting is beautiful. Really discrete and artfully done, but it's a world away from most of the current colourisation craze. (Would post some owned examples... but... erm, no idea where they are.) Tinted photographs were, I think, more usually presented as artistic efforts rather than the current perception of colourised as somehow automatically better. Not getting into the wider colourisation debate here, as there's a thread for that.
I say leave them alone as it is a well established fact that the Great War was fought in black and white as was the greater part of WW2.