You're starting to touch on the vigorous debates that a few media editors
have and which hardly anyone else understands. Let's frame the terms of
discussion properly, though: you begin from the debatable presumption that
restoration and creative input are mutually exclusive concepts.
-Durova
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Carcharoth <carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com>wrote;wrote:
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Durova
<nadezhda.durova(a)gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
Compare that creative effort to--for example--the
creative intuition of
reconstructing Admiral David Farragut's eyes.
Some would say that any attempt to recreate the eyes and present it as
a "restored" photograph is misleading. It crosses the line into a a
new creation, rather than a restoration. Intuitive, maybe, creative,
yes, but accurate? Who can tell.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restoration_of_the_Sistine_Chapel_frescoes#Eyes
If you paint the eyes back onto the Sistine Chapel ceiling, have you
truly restored it? Or have you created something new?
Carcharoth
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l