[dragonwriter]

No more so than any other colorization method that isn’t dependent on out-of-band info about the particular image (and even that is just more constrained informed guesswork.)

That's what happens when you are filling in missing info that isn't in your source.

EDIT: Of course, color photography can be “bullshit” rather than accurate in relation to the actual colors of things in the image; as is the case with the red, blue, and green (actual colors of the physical items) uniforms in Star Trek: The Original Series. But, also fairly frequently, lots of not-intentionally-distortive reproductions of skin tones (often most politically sensitive in the US with racially non-White subjects, where there are also plenty of examples of deliberate manipulation.)

[morelisp]

Showing color X on TVs by actually making the thing color Y in the studio, well, filming, not bullshit. It's an intentional choice playing out as intended. It is meant to communicate a particular thing and does so.

[dragonwriter]

That particular thing was not intentional, and is the reason why the (same color in person, different material) command wrap uniform that is supposed to be color-matched to the made-as-green uniforms isn’t on screen.

But, yes, in general inaccurate color reproduction can be intentionally manipulated with planning to intentionally create appearances in photos that do not exist in reality.