Comments on: [Pics] Manipulated Photos Of Notable Historic Figures Before The Digital Era (Before And After Images)

By: Robert Johnston

Robert Johnston — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 08:35:00 +0000

It was a lot easier than most think. Ive been involved in photography for 74 years, and did a bit myself. Just made a print of each photo. Using a single edge razor blade, cut out the figure to be placed in the photo. Placed it over the position, cut out the underlying portion. Put the new image in the print. (attaching it with photo mounting wax paper) Retouched the area around the cut portion with dyes and made a copy of the entire image. Usually with a 4×5 or 8×19 negative. Then at times did some retouching on the negative if necessary. The main difference today, is that it takes a lot less time to do the job in Photoshop. What might have taken hours then, can do in minutes today.

By: Mark E.

Mark E. — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 20:14:00 +0000

Now if we could just find the publications from each of these eras entitled “Clients From Hell”…

By: Crissa

Crissa — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 01:21:00 +0000

Having another photo of the location is best, but often yes, they’d need a painter’s skill to reconstruct a negative to then blend into the area. Dodging, burning, sponging, cut and paste – all these terms come from the prior era of photos.

By: Crissa

Crissa — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 01:20:00 +0000

Original light is the best technology. The pixels we use today hide the stitches that would always show in the doctored photos.

By: Kristofor Jensen

Kristofor Jensen — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 15:19:00 +0000

At least they didn’t have to worry too much about the balacing the color…

By: cristian tudorache

cristian tudorache — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 09:39:00 +0000

i bet they used content aware fill..

By: Michael Kormos

Michael Kormos — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 17:35:00 +0000

These are great. I recall reading somewhere that Stalin would often make people (who opposed him) in high government positions disappear, and then proceed to erase them from every photo they appeared in. It usually involved making a large print from the negative, then having artists paint the person out. A copy of the print would then be made, and distributed.

By: Samuel Joubert

Samuel Joubert — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:32:00 +0000

Ya this is incredible! Maybe they hired some excellent painters to remove / add stuff? Then they took another photo?

By: David Martin

David Martin — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 13:51:00 +0000

Being pedantic, the one containing (or not containing) King George VI has Queen Elizabeth the King’s consort, not the current Queen Elizabeth II..

By: noamgalai

noamgalai — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 13:49:00 +0000

amazing set