David K. Israel
11 Brilliantly Colorized Historic Photos
by David K. Israel - January 19, 2012 - 9:24 AM

Swedish artist Sanna Dullaway loves to colorize historic photos. Something she does for fun, but also as a business. The following images come from her wonderful album over on Imgur, where you can see many more.

Let’s have a little fun with this. Without hovering over the photos and getting the names off the title tags, let’s see who can list the names of every person pictured below, in order. Bragging rights to the first one who successfully does it! Ready, set, go!










More from mental_floss…

11 Stunning Cakes That Look Exactly Like Other Foods
*
119 Amazing Facts for National Trivia Day
*
The Easter Island “Heads” Have Bodies
*
10 Facebook Status Updates Gone Horribly Wrong
*
11 Insane Features of Normal Human Anatomy

twitterbanner.jpg

« Previous Post   -   Next Post »
Click here to get a Risk-Free issue of mental_floss magazine
Comments (52)

  1. Oh wow.

    posted by Heather on 1-19-2012 at 9:40 am

  2. That is so cool. Especially the Lincoln photo. I can now imagine how it would be to meet him in real life.

    posted by Spocker on 1-19-2012 at 9:42 am

  3. I always imagined Lincoln’s suit in that picture to be a bright fire-engine red.

    posted by 8rustystaples on 1-19-2012 at 10:14 am

  4. Darwin, Einstein, Lincoln, Che, Charlie Chaplin, Mark Twain, Teddy Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, Houdini(?), Alfred Hitchcock, Anne Frank.

    posted by Greg on 1-19-2012 at 10:20 am

  5. Beautiful work, but Charlie Chaplin’s eyes were blue!

    posted by Julie on 1-19-2012 at 10:24 am

  6. Close Greg! But no cigar.

    posted by David K. Israel on 1-19-2012 at 10:24 am

  7. The ninth one is messing me up, too!

    posted by Suzie on 1-19-2012 at 10:27 am

  8. Only two I didn’t know were Strinberg and Chaplin.

    posted by Dan on 1-19-2012 at 10:31 am

  9. Extra credit: Does anyone know who the baby is?

    I have no idea, I’m just curious.

    posted by Shannon on 1-19-2012 at 10:32 am

  10. Some of those photos were originally shot in black & white BY CHOICE. It was an artistic choice made by the photographer, not a technical necessity.

    Colourizing the photo of Winston Churchill in particular seems like a slap in the face to the original phototographer, Yousef Karsh.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yousuf_Karsh

    posted by Misthiocracy on 1-19-2012 at 10:37 am

  11. I love these photos.

    posted by Jen on 1-19-2012 at 10:39 am

  12. Regardless of how you feel about colorizing the photos, the work is amazing. I have colorized photos in the past, by choice as an artistic expression, to get the look of hand tinted photos, but her work is amazing in that they don’t look hand tinted but like modern day photographs.

    posted by Shiloh on 1-19-2012 at 10:45 am

  13. Neat! I have never before seen a picture of Charlie Chaplin without his signature hat & mustache!

    posted by Katie Rose on 1-19-2012 at 10:45 am

  14. Are the colors actually the right ones? As far as I’m cocerned it’s possible to find that out. I was just wondering because for my non-professional eyes Lincoln’s bow tie doesn’t look too different from the color of his jacket. Just sayin’…

    Nevertheless, those pictures/photos are great!

    posted by The One on 1-19-2012 at 10:51 am

  15. The Lincoln one is particularly mind-blowing because I have never in my life imagined him in anything but an all black suit with a black tie. I wonder, is he always portrayed that way simply because the photos are black & white?

    posted by JK on 1-19-2012 at 10:52 am

  16. The next step would be to convert these old photos into 3D

    posted by Adam on 1-19-2012 at 10:59 am

  17. These are awesome, but as an earlier poster noted, Chaplin’s eyes were blue.

    posted by ~Cin on 1-19-2012 at 11:06 am

  18. @Shannon – I’ll go for the extra credit: his grandson, Kermit Roosevelt, Jr.

    posted by Betsy on 1-19-2012 at 11:09 am

  19. Great except for the one of the commie Che Guevara. Why do him? Might as well do Chairman Mao too.

    posted by Eric on 1-19-2012 at 11:10 am

  20. Abraham Lincoln’s suit is in the National Museum. It is black, as is the bow tie. Chaplin’s eyes are dark blue. Historically speaking, I don’t think that I’ve ever seen a 3 piece suit where the vest is a different color than the jacket. With relatively little research, these could have been colored appropriately. No knowledge junkies are getting their fix on this post, Mental Floss!

    posted by Shana on 1-19-2012 at 11:14 am

  21. Those Photos were cool.

    posted by chris on 1-19-2012 at 11:16 am

  22. I also first thought Houdini for Chaplin, but then realized it wasn’t him.

    I got all but Strinberg really quickly; and he’s the only one I never heard of.

    The detail on these is amazing.

    posted by Wayne Stevens on 1-19-2012 at 11:19 am

  23. @Eric: Warhol did that already…

    posted by The One on 1-19-2012 at 11:27 am

  24. Chaplin wasn’t hard to guess, his name is on the photo

    posted by Joe on 1-19-2012 at 11:28 am

  25. Very nicely done – BUT (and there’s always a but), to me, Hitchcock is more sinister in B&W. Colorizing him actually softens his eerie-factor, which is counter to my mental imagery.

    Otherwise, I really found these cool to look at.

    As for the baby – any chance it’s the Lindburgh Baby? ;-)

    posted by Matt on 1-19-2012 at 11:32 am

  26. @The One: That’s clearly not my point, but you can substitute Mao then for Trotsky, Lenin, or Marx.

    posted by Eric on 1-19-2012 at 11:36 am

  27. I got them all except the first one, and August Strindberg?? I still don’t know who Strindberg is.

    posted by Jes on 1-19-2012 at 11:48 am

  28. Strindberg is a Swedish socialist writer. That’s all you need to know.

    posted by Eric on 1-19-2012 at 12:04 pm

  29. Awesome photos! Especially the one of the Cuban mass-murdering communist and the Swedish socialist writer!!

    posted by Harry on 1-19-2012 at 12:11 pm

  30. @Eric – history is made by good AND bad people. Why get yer panties in a bunch because some historical characters you don’t like are included? really?? Would you want history to be rewritten to exclude all non-good? May as well go work for Fixxed News….

    posted by robigus on 1-19-2012 at 12:38 pm

  31. There’s something about seein Anne Frank in color that makes her story all the more heartbreaking for me.

    posted by nancy pants on 1-19-2012 at 12:48 pm

  32. Everyone looks more human in color.

    posted by Ed on 1-19-2012 at 1:00 pm

  33. The baby is Kermit Roosevelt Jr:

    http://www.imageenvision.com/sm/0003-0703-2721-2044_picture_of_theodore_roosevelt_holding_kermit_roosevelt_jr.jpg

    posted by Tabby Caat on 1-19-2012 at 1:12 pm

  34. Wow. Beautiful.

    posted by christina on 1-19-2012 at 1:36 pm

  35. @JK That was my thought exactly! I’ve always pictured Lincoln wearing black suits, and when I scrolled past the picture, I wondered to myself if that was simply because I’ve only ever seen him in black & white photos. It’s logical that he would have worn other colors at SOME point, I just never pictured it. Strange!

    posted by dreamer55 on 1-19-2012 at 1:54 pm

  36. This is wonderful. Thanks for sharing.

    posted by alexis on 1-19-2012 at 2:01 pm

  37. I noticed the baby more in the color picture of Teddy than in the b&w one.

    posted by Cattye on 1-19-2012 at 2:22 pm

  38. @ Harry, Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara was Argentine, not Cuban, and there is zero historical record or evidence that he was ‘mass-murdering’.
    I’m guessing you heard that somewhere and are repeating it, perpetuating a cycle of ignorance and missinformation instead of actually researching the facts and bettering yourself.

    posted by Ed on 1-19-2012 at 2:44 pm

  39. Guys, guys, guys…

    Sanna Dullaway is an artist. She doesn’t claim to be a historian. She’s expressing herself through her work, using historic photos. The colors aren’t meant to be accurate to history.

    posted by David K. Israel on 1-19-2012 at 2:50 pm

  40. Faves are Lincoln and Darwin

    posted by xanderjones on 1-19-2012 at 4:11 pm

  41. and yeah, what David Israel said! Jesus, you guys are too smart for your own good sometimes, just have fun once in a while MFers!

    posted by xanderjones on 1-19-2012 at 4:12 pm

  42. As someone who used to do this for extra change back in the day I was shocked at the mis-coloration of Lincoln’s suit and vest. The tie is not quite so bad but I think it is probably black.

    posted by Ken on 1-19-2012 at 4:27 pm

  43. These images are amazing! I don’t care what colour the originals were. I’m really impressed with this artist’s work–especially the close-up of Churchill.

    posted by Adam (a different one from the guy above) on 1-19-2012 at 5:04 pm

  44. Ed,

    What about this?

    http://cubaarchive.org/home/images/stories/truth%20and%20memory/victims_of_che_guevara_in_cuba_9.30.2009.pdf

    posted by Dr. Fact on 1-19-2012 at 5:44 pm

  45. What is it with the orange-and-blue (or sepia and cyan)combo. There are millions of colors…mix ‘em up!!

    posted by Mark Patterson on 1-20-2012 at 6:58 am

  46. @robigus – Agreed. I would have liked to have seen a Hitler rendition as well so that these pictures could be completely unbiased. That’s a weak argument.

    @Ed – your ignorance is masked only by your intellectual pride. See the post by Dr. Fact. As the son of a Cuban immigrant and friend of many others, I can tell you that these are only the documented murders. Also, please don’t hide behind the “he didn’t kill those people he only ordered their execution” argument because that would only prove the El Che was a coward and would only further the argument that his does not belong in this group of pictures.

    posted by Chris on 1-20-2012 at 10:19 am

  47. I love everytyhing about this…..I dont care if the colors are historically acurate or not cause that is not really the point. The point is seeing some of these people in a different light than we have ever seen them before and done in such a way that makes them seem to be more “personal” and less “historical”.
    Great post, thank you!!!

    posted by Jennifer on 1-20-2012 at 10:28 am

  48. I too wondered about the historical accuracy of the colors, although as someone pointed out, they are an artist’s expression. However what I really notice is that the skin color is all the same. Every person is the same rosy shade of white. Some who are old have the coloration of youth. It is striking to see these people in color but it does make me wish to see how they actually, naturally would have looked.
    (And as for Che, there’s no reason he doesn’t belong here, regardless of his history. He helped a dictator overthrow a dictator. Lives were lost. He also helped lepers in South America and went to medical school to try to find a cure for asthma. He’s not a saint but he’s no Hitler.)

    posted by Rose on 1-20-2012 at 2:55 pm

  49. Now that I’ve seen her actual site I can say not everyone is rosy white. Also, for the Che commentors (again), if you look at her work in the Imgur site, you will see both good and bad things. Mental Floss was just pulling a diverse handful of images to show and represent her work over there.

    posted by Rose on 1-20-2012 at 3:00 pm

  50. So sad they didn’t put one up of a smiling hitler!

    It would have been great to see yet ANOTHER socialist in full chroma :)

    posted by eddie on 1-21-2012 at 5:34 am

  51. These colorizations help make the past come to life (even if as pointed out above there are some inaccuracies).

    The last one made me stop and look for a long, long time…

    posted by MetFanMac on 1-22-2012 at 3:43 am

  52. Wow…just wow! I’m so use to seeing them in B&W that my brain sees the colorized pictures as modern day people posing to match the B&W pictures. Anne Frank has the most impact (imo). Something about seeing her in color makes her so…real.

    posted by amanda on 1-22-2012 at 10:32 am

Comment

commenting policy