Question This is very sepia compared to other images. Is that normal? Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: For the era and this kind of print, I'd say it's in the normal range. Now, I have darkened it a bit from the faded original, and that did up the saturation slightly, which you could argue was fade correction, but could also argue for tweaking it back. To give a few examples of otfrom various museums, and using only originals, for comparison:
There's such a wide range that I don't think this is out of line. At the same time, there's such a wide range that tweaking the saturation down a bit (not to greyscale, but a little bit) wouldn't be out of line either. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 8.3% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600th FP! 13:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure there is an 'expert' view as to what to do (and you're probably in that category!). I just downloaded it and clicked 'autotone' in Photoshop and I much prefer the result but as for authenticity? I have no idea. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:14, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: I don't have photoshop, but I'd say this is equally acceptable colours. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 8.3% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600th FP! 11:55, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Since it's been mentioned, I'll add that I would probably prefer a slightly more desaturated version, but it's just a personal taste. Support either way. Choliamb (talk) 18:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MER-C, Bammesk, Choliamb, and Charlesjsharp: Since people have stated a preference, and I think either is valid, I've switched to the slightly less saturated version. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 8.3% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600th FP! 10:41, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Noted, no preference between the two. MER-C 18:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Either version is fine. Bammesk (talk) 01:41, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Confirming my support. Choliamb (talk) 02:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]