next »

Total Members: 1579
New This Month: 8
New This Week: 2
New Today: 1

Business Portrait

Bella Italia

Cutting the cake

End of summer carnival

[glennab]

Hi volunteers

I didn't think this one would be as problematic as it has been, but it's a bear.  I don't want to add too much detail, as there isn't much to begin with.  Tried to keep some texture.  But I don't know if this is good enough or not.  I'd appreciate any feedback you might have for me, as I've re-done it 3 times now, and don't like any of the versions.

Original


Restoration so far:


Thanks for taking a look.

GK

[Hannie]

Hi Glenna,

Less face may work for you!
What you did looks great, why don't you try and make what you have lighter?

Hannie

[Ausimax]

Hi Glenna,

I think you have done a pretty creditable job on this one, you have captured the eyes well which is about the only distinguishing feature the original had.

Lightening it up as Hannie has done will help, the only other things I can see that would improve it would be to thicken and define the lower lip just a little and darken some spaces between her teeth to give them some definition.

Some of these faces are such a challenge, the two I am doing of the wedding and all the others of the same set I have seen, all have damage to the brides face, whilst the groom seems to have got off relatively unscathed.


Max

[lurch]

GK - Stellar job! I wouldn't lighten the face as much as Hannie did, but it would benefit from a little. Don't know if this technique is allowed since it involves blurring - but I duplicated your background layer, blurred it (about 10-15 pixels in the case of the copy I downloaded here), changed the blend mode to soft light, and reduced opacity to 50%. Subtle change - just perceptible - makes the photo a little more high key.

I'd also work on the hairline a bit. It's soft in a couple of places but too harsh in others.

Love what you've done with the eyes!

[Mhayes]

GK, I think you have done a great job. I do like Hannie's suggestion to lighten the face up, because it will make more of a contrast with the background.

Lurch, not sure what you meant if the technique of blurring is allowed? Blurring is fine, but not good to do a global blurring if it makes a photo look out of focus or gives it a look of being printed on velvet. What do you mean about your changes being high key: "Subtle change-just perceptible-make the photo a little more high key." For me Hannie's is high key and yours is low key because it is darker. A good example of some high key photos: http://www.freephotoresources.com/great-examples-of-high-key-photography/

Margie

[lurch]

Margie, the technique I was referring to was the whole procedure - blurring and then changing mode to soft light. The end result increases contrast and, if anything, creates a very slight sharpening. I reduce layer opacity to moderate the contrast effect. And about the high key thing - what I said was that the result was a little more high key than it was before. Wouldn't call that photo high key. It's actually sort of flat more than either low- or high-key.

[Mhayes]

Lurch, I meant Hannie's was high key--you found hers flat? I guess I got confused, because I couldn't see the sharpening in yours. I wouldn't call the original high key because it is too damaged to make a call.

Margie

[lurch]

Margie, I thought all versions of this photo, including the original, were sort of flat. Hannie's version was least flat, but the face was, to my eye, way too light.

[glennab]

Thanks so much everyone for your input.  Given what you've said, I've reworked my lady a bit.  I'm posting both the original and the updated version for comparison.  As always, feedback welcome.

GK

Original:


New Version:

[Mhayes]

GK, Looking really good! Really minor pic, but you may want to darken the lower part of eye on your right. Where it is light is where the damage cut across.

Margie

[glennab]

Thanks, Margie.  I'll do that.  Will wait until morning just in case anyone else has a suggestion, then I'm sending her back to you.  I think I might choose one a little less mind-blowing this time.  Just for a small break.  Then back to my favorites!

GK

[Ausimax]

Glenna, what are you going to do to fill in your spare time if you start taking easy restores? What was wrong with this one? You had a pair of eyes, what more do you want?

These are the real frustrating ones, where all the minor detail that creates the character of a face is missing, times like this you wish you had some artistic ability, me I couldn't draw water from a well with a bucket, so much for my artistic competence.

Max

[glennab]

Max, I just answered your question.  I took possession of a relatively easy restoration last night, and I'm ready to return it now.

That last one just about did me in!  I'm not an artist (I love your analogy of drawing water from a well - that's the way I feel!), and it showed.  But I was intrigued by the lady's lovely face (what you could see of it) and decided to give it a try.  I think I'll go for ones with a little more detail from now on. The eyes were there, but not enough of anything else was, so to answer your question, I want more, more, more.  The eyes were easy - the rest turned me into a mad woman.  It's bad enough that I'm the GK!

If he's still there, I had another chosen.  Lots of damage, but plenty of good areas from which to pull information.

One thing I discovered with my most recent ones is that when used judiciously, the content aware function in CS5 is absolutely incredible.  As with every other tool, it doesn't work with every type of damage, but it probably saved me several hours on the one I just finished.

Hugs to you, my Aussie pal.  I'm so glad you're back.

GK