Comments by "Mat Broomfield" (@matbroomfield) on "When was this photo taken? - BBC News" video.

Nonsense. The photo is an actual depiction of the moment it was taken. If you take a photo and underexpose it, then when I transfer the photo from your camera I boost the exposure, nobody would say that the photo was not taken on the day you took it.
45
Wow edgy - coming to video you care nothing about to ask "Who cares?". Is this a surly teenage performance piece?
15
Nobody claimed it was faithful to the original. Photography at that time was incapable of recording colour. The original photo was MISSING information. This woman simply restored that missing information. If somebody wrote a book five years ago full of spelling mistakes then someone spell checked it today, you wouldn't claim that the book was written when it was spell checked. If you extract the original photograph from the colourised image, do you still end up with a discernable image? No you don't.
8
No photo is EVER an accurate depiction of the colours in the scene. Colour perception is unique to each person, each camera, the ambient light and other factors. No photo taken before the 1980s is remotely an accurate depiction, but I suspect that this woman is doing a reasonable job. You're right though, she is probably guessing completely about some colours.
5
That's a really interesting question. I would have to say no, but it depends upon your definition of derivative. If I restore a black and white photograph am I creating a derivative piece? If I play a 14th century musical piece, which was never scored for instruments as good as we have now, is it derivative? I can certainly see where you're coming from but it's a blurry line.
5
And for the record, your English is excellent.
3
That's interesting to read. I have done many colourisations, and I just guess at how they should look. I'm glad to read that she takes real care to get the details accurate because I was just kind of thinking "Meh, this is easy to do nowadays".
3