Sepia Saturday challenges bloggers to share family
history through old photographs.
This week’s
Sepia Saturday prompt is almost too
easy: damaged photos. Welcome to my
world. How much time do you have? Several boxes and five photo albums are
filled with damaged photos that keep me occupied for hours on end looking for
signs of familiarity, searching for clues to family relationships, and gleaning
insight into my family’s daily lives.
When I remodeled the bonus room over the garage this past
winter, I wanted to make it my “Gene Cave” (although the hubster has tried to
hijack it with a “Man Cave” big-screen TV and antler mounts). Bookshelves were
decluttered not just to HOLD the old albums and books of research, but also to
DISPLAY them artistically. They are fine, but the focal point of the room is
one wall reserved for old photos of parents, grandparents, and
great-grandparents.
As expected, some of my favorite photos are also the most
damaged. Wrinkles and creases, missing corners, mildew, stains and faded images
can be repaired with software like Photoshop. To restore a photo means to
repair those flaws in order to return it to its original appearance. I am no
pro when it comes to Photoshop, but I can remove random spots and stains; a
crease is easily erased as long as it doesn’t pass through anything intricate.
My brother-in-law, on the other hand, is a champ, so I put him to work
restoring several photos for “The Family Wall.”
However, there has been quite a bit of conversation in
the genealogy world about the ethics of photo editing. In one camp are those
who believe any alteration to a photo is wrong. They hold that wear and tear is
part of the life of a photo. They doubt anyone’s ability to assume or know what
the original even looked like. On the other side are those who want to preserve
old photos as a way to remember and honor their ancestors without the
distortions caused by stains and cracks. They argue that a photo with a “nice”
appearance is easier to understand and enjoy.
I side with those who favor restoration. How could anyone
not prefer the restored version of my lovely great-grandmother, Mary Sudie
Rucker?
Maybe because I have created so many traditional scrapbooks
in which I cropped photos either to highlight a subject or simply to make it
fit on the page, I’m rather cavalier when it comes to manipulating old photos.
I think nothing of editing out a lot of sky as I did with this photo of my
great-grandfather Walter Davis.
Did my use of the cropping tool ruin the picture? Purists
would say yes – just because we CAN do it doesn’t mean we SHOULD. However, I
disagree. I did nothing to alter the essence of the photo since whoever took
the picture (likely my grandaunt Violetta) was focusing on Walter, not the sky.
Truth be told, I would feel no guilt editing out that pole for the sake of aesthetics,
but I chose not to.
This photo of my 2X great-grandfather James Franklin
Jollett could not be enlarged to fit in a 5x7 frame without cutting off his feet.
My brother-in-law deftly cloned some landscape in order to “stretch” the photo
to fit. Did we go too far in altering the geography of the photo? I do not know
what was REALLY there, and honestly, I do not care. Maybe I should, especially
if there was a historically significant building or person in the background. Since
I don’t know, I am comfortable assuming the background was just more of the
same.
This photo of my paternal grandmother Julia Slade is just
bad. The dress is totally blown-out without a sign of detail. Was it a print
fabric? Lace? Were there pin-tucks on the bodice? With enough time, my
brother-in-law could have fashioned quite a nice dress, but even my cavalier
sensibilities said no to that. Dress notwithstanding, it is the best photo of
my grandmother as a young woman so it made the Wall.
In a seeming contradiction, I cannot be more pleased with
a restoration project than my brother-in-law’s masterful manipulation of the
one and only photo of my great-grandfather John Fleming Walsh. It is actually
two little cardboard chips, each smaller than a dime.
He “created” a jacket based on the clues in the photo. He
also straightened John Walsh’s head, probably out of necessity to align with
the collar. Of all the restorations, this one probably pushes the boundaries,
but I have no objections. The coat seems true to the original.
Maybe I’m wishy washy. Maybe I simply rationalize in
order to feel good about my decisions. But I hope I am faithful to some rather conservative
standards for photo restoration:
- Scan photos at a high resolution and save in TIFF format
as a digital master.
- Save any alterations including changing the color,
cropping, or applying more sophisticated techniques such as removing stains and
creases as JPEGs with unique names.
- Stay true to the original as much as possible. That is,
avoid the temptation to Photoshop something in or out that would significantly change
the truth (for example, adding a person to a group shot, deleting a cigar from
someone’s hand).
- Consider how changes to a photo might change the story.
Please visit the Sepia Saturday “family wall” of
bloggers, of whom none have been digitally altered.
© 2015, Wendy Mathias.
All rights reserved.