Hacker News Reader

Comment by craftinator | Hacker News Reader

I approach this from the viewpoint that we have a huge amount of historical media and writings that most people are never exposed to, and altering this historical media in a way that will get it more exposure increases peoples' understanding of the past.

View on HN

My 11 year old had little interest in World War II until he saw the series “World War II in Color” on Netflix. He’s watched every episode and now reads books on the subject.

https://www.netflix.com/title/70254851

Based on the same thing happening in my family, this morning I came to the conclusion that I would pay for my wedding video (1990) to be upscaled just to rejuvenate the interest of my kids in said video.

The thing with "modern" quality is that it distracts so much less that it becomes far easier to consummate. And that does not just apply to young kids but to me as well.

I think it depends on your experience. I’m old enough to remember my 12 inch B&W TV and broadcast analog NTSC being normal, with 483 lines of resolution.

So I don’t mind the old stuff, it does not distract me at all.

But I can understand that if you only experience 1080P and above your whole life, 483 lines in b&w is distracting.

Which show did your children gravitate to that’s been colorized/upscale? I want to see if it has the same effect.

Exactly. What use is a well-preserved grainy, flickery video that no one watches? Even more, how do we understand history if we only see it through a blurry, scratchy lens? It might change our perception of the people who lived 100 years ago if we can only imagine them in a limited color scheme.

I agree that the originals shouldn't be lost but there's no reason not to do restoration if it is done carefully or tastefully.

So kind of like trying to read the original blotch manuscripts from Beethoven vs reading clean modern sheet music. Or better yet listening to a modern orchestra playing it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com