Sir, – I read with interest Daniel Ayiotis' defence of colourising historical images ("Colourisation of old images enables greater empathy", November 22nd). He equates colourisation to routine restoration work of both moving and static imagery.
This is a false analogy; colourisation is the alteration, not restoration of historical documentation.
Ayiotis will be aware of the excellent work being done in restoring and enhancing the colour pigmentation contained in autochromes, some examples dating as far back as 1904. This is uncontroversial because it can accurately be classified as restoration.
Ayiotis writes that that opposing the current colourisation mania is elitist but assuring his readers that the original monochrome images have not themselves been permanently altered is somewhat patronising.
:fill(white):background_color(white)/static.themebuilder.aws.arc.pub/irishtimes/1647534191476.png)
This reader simply regrets that it is becoming almost impossible to tell whether a given vintage colour illustration is original (accurate), or not.
– Yours, etc,
DERMOT MADDEN,
Tallaght,
Dublin 24