Historical photographs get a 'colorised' makeover - in pictures; Sarah Gilbert

The Guardian Newspaper November 18th 2013
I noticed this subject on one of the OCA subject forums recently and have been studying each of the images to see what I think of them being coloured as opposed to being black and white.  The website address is:
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2013/nov/18/historical-photographs-get-a-colorized-makeover-in-pictures

There are so many images to look through that I've just chosen two or three to comment on.  Also I deliberately didn't look at the comments below before I commented as I wanted to form my own impressions before being influenced by other people's comments.

Picture 1 - Civil Right march on Washington 1963 courtesy of the Library of Congress, by Jordan J Lloyd/Dynamichrome

I think this picture has been improved by colouring it.  The picture has more depth and give more of the impression of how many people actually took part in the march.  It can be better to look at a black and white image as you are not distracted by colour but colour definitely enhances this image.

Picture 2 - Three farmers swig bottles of Old Milwaukee lager, 1941 Photograph: Arthur Siegel/Library of Congress

The gentle colourisation of this image gives it much more depth.  The colours make the men seem  real as they drink from their bottles of beer.  This picture give a good impression of how working class men in lower class America looked and dressed .

 Picture 3 - Abraham Lincoln circa 1863, in colour. Colorized by: Sanna Dullaway

Whoever coloured this picture of Abraham Lincoln managed to enhance much more details than are visible in the initial black and white image.  The image of Lincoln give an impression of the real man, not just a cardboard cutout against a grey background, much better.

The overall thought that comes to mind is why colour something that is clearly so historical?  Someone must have too much time on their hands to be able to sit down and colour in all those people who attended that civil rights march in Washington. 

Interestingly, the comments fall about 50/50 for and against.  Some are vehemently against changing history and others feel it's not a bad thing and brings history to life.