Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Recent Posts
[Today at 09:22:01 AM]

[April 20, 2014, 09:25:32 AM]

[April 18, 2014, 11:52:27 AM]

[April 14, 2014, 02:37:02 PM]

[April 13, 2014, 07:07:55 PM]

[April 13, 2014, 12:20:21 AM]

[April 09, 2014, 05:34:36 PM]

[April 07, 2014, 11:23:03 AM]

[April 06, 2014, 02:49:33 PM]

[April 06, 2014, 02:57:08 AM]
OPR Theme-o-matic

Locations of visitors to this page
Total Members: 2322
New This Month: 5
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Sorry, you do not have permission to view pictures!
Operation Photo Rescue's Online Community | The OPR Workshop « OPR Workshops « Easy « Topic: Your invitation to a nitpickin' fest!
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Your invitation to a nitpickin' fest!  (Read 1035 times)
bobbydazzler
OPR Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Location: Beautiful Upper Teesdale
Posts: 11



WWW
« on: May 09, 2012, 11:39:26 AM »

My first submission to OPR...before I throw myself at the mercy of QC please be honest!

(but gentle  Azn)



Many thanks,
Bob
Logged

Mike S.
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Michigan
Posts: 427



« Reply #1 on: May 09, 2012, 02:59:32 PM »

Hello Bobby,

It is really starting to look nice.  A big improvement over the original.

I wonder about a couple of things.  Looks like dirt below the right eye of the boy.  There was some on the left side of the face which you worked on and maybe it goes to the right side also?  Also, on the left side of the face your corrections look almost like an "H" when viewed.  I don't know what the original size is so can't tell if it will show up on the finished picture.  The Work In Process or corrected version looks grainier than the original, did you induce grain or is it just the low resolution Forum Pictures?  It is apparent in the TV screen (and the damage shows up more).  The boys sweater and pants also appear grainier.  When I blow up your corrected picture, some damage in the carpet still shows but also everything is flat from the spot healing brush or whatever you used.  You might try the Patch Tool and drag over some texture just to the left of that area (between the boys left leg and the right edge of the picture).  There again it might not show up in the printed picture depending on the size.

Feel free to nit pick my posts as I put up a picture every week or so.

Thank you,

Mike

Logged

Mike S.
bobbydazzler
OPR Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Location: Beautiful Upper Teesdale
Posts: 11



WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 10, 2012, 07:20:46 AM »

Hey Mike,

Many thanks for taking the time to comment, I appreciate any and all feedback, got a lot to learn!

The 'dirt' below the boy's right eye....this bothered me also yet taking it out, toning it down, all seemed to not look quite right. It's probably just me. I'll have another try.

The 'H' pattern on the boy's left cheek....it reminded me of my young grandson when he come's indoors from the cold. He always has a little 'marbling' (for want of a better word) to his cheeks Smiley I thought this looked nice and 'honest' in this photo?

The grain....no I didn't induce any. This photo had lots of layers and merging carried out to it. Wonder if that caused these artifacts? (although the transition to JPEG I believe hasn't helped) You are indeed correct Mike, needs fixing! I think I'll try a surface blur (with some degree of finesse in the settings Thumbs up) along with a 'hide all' mask to then reintroduce, selectively, the blur back to the obvious, grainy areas? Would this be a smart solution to this problem??

The carpet....I'm sorry for being dim but I'm not entirely sure I follow when you say 'flat'. Do you mean I should have some sharper detail in there? (I see a bit, far left that's definitely lacking). For the life of me I can't seem to get that patch tool to work well! I can pick up textures etc. fine but when I place them down elsewhere it always seems to introduce a lot of light and colour etc. from the area immediately below where I want to place it (the patch). I've checked the settings for the tool many times and can't figure out why  Mad

Thanks again for pointing these out Mike, I appreciate it.

Regards, Bob

P.S. I think the boy's sweater could be a little too dark and muddy also?....when does experience provide confidence?  Roll Eyes

Logged

glennab
OPR Master
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Gulfport (St. Petersburg), Florida
Posts: 3239



« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2012, 08:08:05 PM »

Hi Bob and Mike

I downloaded the photo and checked it out.  Nice job - especially if it's your first restoration. For the life of me, I can't see any more grain in the restoration than I see in the original.  Bob, your color correction looks great. I don't see anything amiss on the boy's sweater.

I do see what Mike's saying about the carpet.  If you look at the area behind the boy just below the wrapping paper, you'll see that it has a fairly high "pile" - it's pretty fluffy.  Then look down in the lower left corner and you can see your corrections where the carpet doesn't have that fluffy look - it's flat, lighter and you can see some cloned areas.  You can take your patch tool, circle a relatively small area where the carpet is flat, drag it up to the good carpet and let it snap back to the flat part. You may have to do it several times to cover just the center of the flat area.  If you get too close to anything else, you could pick up artifacts, and then you'll have to clone from the good part that you've created from the patch tool.  It's quite a balance to keep from having obvious repairs, but you'll be amazed at how great the patch tool works once you're accustomed to it. That combined with cloning should do the trick. I'm sure you'll have to clone around the edges. Keep changing your source, so the cloned areas aren't obvious.

I can tell you that it took me quite a while to get comfortable with the healing tools and determining when to use them and when to jump in with the clone stamp.  There are times when cloning is still the best way to repair.  I'm a compulsive watcher of tutorials, and I've seen some amazing techniques achieved with just the clone stamp.

This would be a call by your distributor, but I think the flash reflection should be removed from the TV. It's the first thing that draws your eye, and I doubt that it would be missed.  The owner would probably appreciate its absence.

Cheers

GK
Logged

What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal. ~Albert Pine

(Photoshop CS5 /Mac Pro)
bobbydazzler
OPR Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Location: Beautiful Upper Teesdale
Posts: 11



WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 14, 2012, 12:21:01 PM »

Glannab, thank you for taking the time to post your observations....and thank's for jolting me out of my mental torpor regarding the patch tool....changing the 'destination', 'source' settings....why didn't I think of that  Embarrassed

Yes it is my first 'proper' restoration. I altered the areas Mike mentioned and uploaded it to my distributor....thankfully all was well so relief was the order of the day (to say the least) Smiley

I should have waited though, your comment regarding the reflection in the TV was another issue I had some reservation with  Sad

Ahh well, a lesson for next time. Thank you once again...and if there's anything I can help you with
please don't hesitate to shout! (English irony right there)  Wink

Later, Bob
Logged

Mhayes
OPR President
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Kansas
Posts: 4081



« Reply #5 on: May 14, 2012, 02:34:33 PM »

Bob,

Anytime you want to change something on a photo you have already uploaded, it's OK to send a 2nd copy You might on your extension add "rev' or something to let the distributor know you tweaked it some more.

Very nice job on your first restore!

Margie
Logged

"carpe diem"

Margie Hayes
OPR President
mhayes@operationphotorescue.org
Mike S.
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Michigan
Posts: 427



« Reply #6 on: May 14, 2012, 08:12:26 PM »

Glenna,

Maybe it's just my bionic eyes (both operated on in January) but the grain is most prevalent in the TV Picture Tube, it makes the Work In Progress (TV tube) look grainier than the original.  It looks like it is magnifying the damage.  Fixing the tube reflection should solve it.   I will say that now that I know it is a 4x5 picture that the grain does not look objectionable in the sweater or pants at that size.

Still very good work.

Thank you,

Mike
Logged

Mike S.
glennab
OPR Master
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Gulfport (St. Petersburg), Florida
Posts: 3239



« Reply #7 on: May 14, 2012, 09:59:46 PM »

Mike, did you have cataract surgery?  If so, I'm wondering how it went for you.  IM (my hubby) had his second surgery last week, and other than the annoying routine of constant eye drops for the first few days, his went absolutely great.  I hope yours did, too.  He was slowly losing his sight and it was happening slowly enough that he wasn't aware it was happening for quite a while.  He also had a few holes drilled to alleviate pressure from glaucoma caused by diabetes.  It'll be a month or two until all the swelling goes down and we know how much that helped, but his surgeon was happy with his progress.  We're certainly relieved.

I still have the same old eyes I've always had, so I hope I'm still seeing well enough to catch things like the grain in Bob's restoration, but I'll depend on your "bionics" to keep me straight.  I zoomed in on both images and honestly didn't see a difference.  I suspect that printing would remove most of that grain, anyway.

I have to say, it's great to be back and checking out what's going on.  I hope to be able to start grabbing some restorations of my own before long.  When things were really slow last year - just before the tornadoes and floods hit, OPR got really slow, so I contacted Photo Rescue Japan to see if I could help them in the interim.  As is my usual routine, I grabbed the most difficult one they had, because no one else would touch it.  I took possession of it last July, and I'm only about half way through it, because I became ill and had to give up restorations altogether for months (that's why I've been missing in action on OPR's forum for so long.  My brain quit working correctly, and it's still not 100%, so if my posts get a little odd or misspelled, it's because I'm still working with a mechanic on repairing that).

I just discovered (and you all might take note of this if I haven't already mentioned it) that Adobe 5 and earlier versions have a problem with tiff files. I lost about 10 hours on my tsunami restoration because what they sent me was a tiff, and I assumed they were safe to work on.  My files became corrupt, and even the back-up files were corrupt.  I contacted Adobe, and they refused to acknowledge that they had a problem with tiffs. My files were irretrievable.  I just found out through one of my professional Facebook groups that there is, indeed, a problem with tiffs.  At first Adobe was insisting that in order to fix the problem, one had to purchase either PS 5.5 or 6, at a cost of $199. There was such an uproar over that, that they're now providing a patch to correct the problem for free. My passport photo that I scanned for the Mothers' Day thread was scanned as a tiff, because that's the highest quality file I can scan.  My computer went berserk.  I couldn't rename my file; I couldn't change it to a psd.  I finally had to restart before the glitch went away.  So tomorrow, I'm going to find out where to get the patch and load it.  And I'd recommend that you all do the same thing.  I'll make a new post about this as well, so that no one misses it.  I'll find out how to get the patch before I post any more about it, because I'm not positive that it's available yet.  My pals in the Photoshop and Lightroom group will know, and I'll pass on the information.
Logged

What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal. ~Albert Pine

(Photoshop CS5 /Mac Pro)
Mike S.
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Michigan
Posts: 427



« Reply #8 on: May 15, 2012, 08:32:03 AM »

Hi Glenna,

Yes cataract surgery.  I now have for the first time in my entire life 20-20 Vision in both eyes with the right being slightly better.  The only problem I had was during the operation they put a gel in my eyes (normal process) to prevent the eye from collapsing and the equipment malfunctioned when removing the gel and because it is clear it is very hard to tell if all is removed.  The gel blocked up the drainage ducts increasing the pressure to 3.5 times normal.  I now know that for that eye a pressure of 14 is normal and 49 means about a grade 8 (1 to 10 scale) headache.  This is the point where you start throwing up and going into shock, I know I was there.  The morning after I was able to get an appointment with the doctor and it took a needle in the eye to relieve it.   Two pills solved the rest of the drainage problem. 

If you want to imagine a funny picture think about every time the doctor left the room to get another piece of equipment (twice) I would get down on the floor and put my legs up in a chair to control the shock systems and nausea.   Other than that, like you said it is just the drops.

I will say that the doctor I have is very good because my eyes were really a mess from astigmatism, contrast and old age (I could see black and white but not a lot of grey).  The doctor replaced the internal lens but also made cuts on the cornea similar to Lasik without the laser, just a diamond knife.  He and I both were extremely happy how well both turned out.  Even with the issue I had I was very happy I had it done.  The doctor did have the manufacturer out to fix the equipment right a way.

Amazing but what made me decide to get the operation was feedback on the Forum about contrast.  I owe Johnboy thanks for that.  He told me my contrast was off and I showed it to Pat and she agreed.  I could not see it so this is proof that the Forum is good for your health.

My thanks to Bob (Bobbydazzler) for the good work on the picture.

Mike
Logged

Mike S.
bobbydazzler
OPR Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Location: Beautiful Upper Teesdale
Posts: 11



WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 15, 2012, 07:20:22 PM »

No thanks needed Mike....it's a pleasure to be able to try and help out such a good cause!

Pleased to hear that you're both roaring fit and ready to go! Smiley

Thanks again to all for your much valued feedback.

Bob
Logged

glennab
OPR Master
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Gulfport (St. Petersburg), Florida
Posts: 3239



« Reply #10 on: May 15, 2012, 09:26:49 PM »

Mike, I'm sorry you had the glitch in your surgery - that sounds miserable - I'm not sure I'd call it funny - but it's wonderful that the final results have been so positive, especially having 20-20 in both eyes.  That's just plain awesome! JB seems to be good for a lot of things.  I think he's very much worth keeping around.  I know I've missed working with him and all of you while my brain has taken its vacation.

Bob, I'm so glad I was able to help you with your restoration.  Since I'm not able to work on my own yet, I'll be lurking and hoping to be able to at least monitor what's happening in case I can jump in with my opinion on a challenge. Getting through your first restoration is huge!  Be sure once your distributor okays it to post it in the before and after gallery.  I don't know about the rest of the volunteers, but I love seeing everyone's amazing work.  They're masterpieces.

Cheers!

GK (in case any newbies wonder about my initials, they go back to when our beloved Aussie Max was still active and doing his great restorations.  Because I tended to rack up posts by the hundreds, he decided that I was garrulous (I had to admit to that), and somewhere along the line I became a Kracken.  Hence the Garrulous Kracken or GK.  It stuck, so for at least 4 years I've been GK. I've been called worse!)
Logged

What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal. ~Albert Pine

(Photoshop CS5 /Mac Pro)
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
Operation Photo Rescue's Online Community | The OPR Workshop « OPR Workshops « Easy « Topic: Your invitation to a nitpickin' fest!
 
Jump to: