So which path would you follow? 1. Eliminate the paper texture during restoration because a textureless background facilitates physical printout? 2. Convert to vector graphics? 3. Remain in raster grahics and keep the paper texture to preserve the look and feel of a period document?
All three directions have led to featured pictures. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Punch_-_Masculine_beauty_retouched1.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ornamental_Alphabet_-_16th_Century.svg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lincoln_and_Johnsond.jpg The third option opens its own set of questions: balance the white to "hot off the presses" new? Day old? Five years in the scrapbook? Historic media editors debate these decisions; there are good arguments for and against all of them. And there isn't any absolute solution. Sometimes we change our minds. -Durova On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Ray Saintonge <sainto...@telus.net> wrote: > Durova wrote: > > Restoration is inherently interpretive. Consider something simple: a > > newspaper cartoon in black and white. There are many possible whites; > which > > do you select? > > The reasonable assumption is that the background white is an unprinted > area; the white is a function of the paper rather than of the > printing.. Otherwise we need to distinguish between a printing on fresh > paper and an old printing on paper that has since yellowed with age. > > Ec > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- http://durova.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l