"Restored" petroglyph

JuanoJuano Major grinsColoradoRegistered Users Posts: 3,942 Major grins
edited July 27, 2019 in Other Cool Shots

I shot this pic some time ago and I can't stand that some idiot in 1892 decided to vandalize it...

So I decided to try to restore it, is this acceptable or a definite no, no...


  • black mambablack mamba Major grins Jacksonville, FLRegistered Users Posts: 7,003 Major grins

    I don't know about legal, moral, or ethical considerations but I sure choose your " adjusted " image over the other. Good work.

    I always wanted to lie naked on a bearskin rug in front of a fireplace. Cracker Barrel didn't take kindly to it.
  • David_S85David_S85 Spotter of Dgrin Spam and Oddities ChicagolandAdministrators Posts: 12,557 moderator

    If there was only a way to go back to 1892 and stop them. The restored version looks much better.

    My Smugmug
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
  • StumblebumStumblebum I shoot, therefore I am San Jose, CARegistered Users Posts: 7,951 Major grins

    Definitely the restored version! Brilliant!

  • JuanoJuano Major grins ColoradoRegistered Users Posts: 3,942 Major grins

    Thanks guys, I feel better... I think it's a beautiful petroglyph and it is shame that it got vandalized.

  • CornflakeCornflake Major grins ArizonaRegistered Users Posts: 2,738 Major grins

    A lot of petroglyphs here have been vandalized and quite a bit of it happened in the nineteenth century. The early settlers didn't place much value on ruins and petroglyphs.

    I've though about your question. Obviously, there's no "right" answer. I sometimes take great liberties with photos that aren't meant to be representational. I usually don't do that with photos of ruins and petroglyphs because they're almost inherently representational. But I don't know anything and there's no reason you should reach the same answer I do.

  • pathfinderpathfinder Drive By Digital Shooter western IndianaSuper Moderators Posts: 14,539 moderator

    Cristobal, I "restore" my petroglyphs images frequently, for the reasons you gave. I prefer to see them as I envision them when they were first created before the scratch marks and bullet holes which offer nothing to the image in my mind.

    Now, if I was recording the images for a textbook or Wikipedia page, as an accurate representation of their present appearance, then no, I would not edit them ; but I am usually simply creating them for my own enjoyment.

    Interesting, your images seem to include people on horseback maybe, so these would date after the Spanish entrance into North America. They look older than that to me, but horses were not here before the Spanish brought them.

    I like to think of enjoying petroglyphs or pictographs late at night, by moonlight, after the long days hunt is over, by a campfire and after a full meal. Like they were seen by the artists who created them.

    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • JuanoJuano Major grins ColoradoRegistered Users Posts: 3,942 Major grins

    Thanks for the comments. I agree with pathfinder on both arguments. Since I want this image for me and I am not documenting the site, I like the more idyllic view. I hadn't thought about the horses, this is part of the petroglyphs in the newspaper rock area, the earlier carvings are around 2000 years old, but people kept adding on to it, including the guy in 1892...

Sign In or Register to comment.