Hacker News Reader

As a photographer, I’ve noticed that no two photos of a given painting ever look the same. There is much variation due to lighting, color temperature, sensor capabilities, etc. Without controlling for these variables, it’s hard to see how comparisons can be made accurately.

View on HN

I don't think basic color accuracy matters for this, it's more macro. In other words, two professionally taken images of a painting aren't going to make it look bright and colorful in one, and dark and somber in another.

Whether there's a slight green tint, or a certain blue doesn't pop quite as much, doesn't seem like it would affect the findings.

I've seen exactly what you said isn't going to happen in two pro photos of an old (pre-1800s) painting.

One might have been altered to reduce the effect of centuries of oil-lamp soot, but it's still true.

Not just that. A much larger confounding factor is that paintings change over time. If you've ever watching a painting restoration video, you'll discover that the way a painting looks today depends dramatically on its age, how it was stored, and what restorations have been applied to it and when. Varnish yellows over time. Before electricity, rooms were light by fire which deposits ash everywhere.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com