"In 1966, the world was a different place. There was no Google yet. Or Yahoo. Or Neatorama, for that matter."

More significantly there was no internet, but the author of this site seems to have missed that. And that's not the only thing that got missed. The author clearly didn't think that there would be at least as many visitors from outside the US as inside it, and yet most of those facts are US centric.

"In the year 1966, the time when you arrived on this planet, books were still popularly read on paper, not on digital devices. Trees were felled to get the word out."

Er, well yes and in 2011 books are still popularly read on paper. Whoever authored this needs to realise that just because they have an ebook reader that doesn't mean that most of the rest of the world doesn't still read paper books.

3/10 Not a bad idea, but needs a lot more work. Start again with a clean sheet and see what you can do with a little effort.

@Manuel - Trust me, 1984 wasn't that good a year. I lived through it and not a whole lot significant happened.

Revealed? Indeed it was, many many years ago.

Ah, but every British person of the correct age knows your philtrum is really called your Kevin.

Except of course it's 2011, not 11. That was 2000 years ago.

@PWMoore - the problem here is a matter of personal taste when it comes to exposure and contrast. With a colour photograph you will always get those who think your choices for exposure and contrast are wrong. With a monochrome image it seems people are even more picky, perhaps because there is no varaition in colour available.

The problem the restorer would have with an image like this is that there is absolutely no detail in the highlights. Indeed there seldom was with a tintype. The fact that the original image has faded and become darker gives the impression that there is detail there, but if you look closely there is none. As such I think the restoration is as good as you are going to get from that original.

One thing I have to explain often to people who think photoshop is the solution to their poor photographs is that you can't put in detail that wasn't there in the first place. In this case I doubt there was ever much detail in the highlights, but any that was there has disappeared over time. There was nothing that could be done about the missing detail in this photograph. The only incorrect choice that was made to my mind (and this is just personal taste) was not to tone the finished image slightly to maintain its vintage character.

No we are not all synaethetes at all, that's a gross misrepresentation of what synaethesia actually is.

Coke to wash away the taste of the butter? I'd rather taste butter than coke.

@Christolisto - I'm sure others could say that about posts you enjoy. You're not interested, but still took the time to read the post and then comment on it. Strange way to demonstrate you don't car.

Strange thought it may seem this site is not tailored specifically to suit you.

Not these things again. They pop up every so often usually with some pretty amazing claims for speeds and distances travelled.

Personally I'll stick with a surfboard or maybe an SUP when there isn't any swell.

@ChrisfromFrance how dull are you?

When he says he won't just trust it to any old lab, what he presumably means is that he won't trust the testing to any lab who are likely to come back with an inconvenient (for him) result. Or to put it another way he doesn't want anybody telling him this earth shattering scientific discovery was actually left behind by a bear.

This isn't the worst of it. Some TV shows use shots of other people's crowds. I first spotted it years ago when I thought I'd seen a crowd shot somewhere before. Then coincidentally saw the same crowd shot watching a VHS later in a completely different show.

@Fran where's here? Is it perchance a country where it's OK to clip and stick a doberman's ears into a pointy shape or dock a dogs tail. Both much crueler than dying it's fur methinks.

I find artist's statements annoying simply because if any artist needs to publish a statement then they are not a particularly good artists. Art should always be able to stand on its own. If the artist needs to explain their philosophy then they are clearly not confident that their work can stand up for itself.

My son loves that, just because the replacement car looks a lot like our car. And of course he loves lego.