• Welcome to Operation Photo Rescue's Online Community.
 

Tips? (How far should I go?)

Started by Sampa, August 26, 2014, 05:08:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Sampa

Hi Everybody,

This is my first restoration project for OPR. I've done a lot of compositing, but am as new to restoring as I am to OPR.
I'd really appreciate some guidance as to how far to take this image, because I don't want to overdo it.

This is the only photo I've got, so there isn't a lot to go by.
Channels don't yield much as far as I can see.
Below are three stages: 1.original  2.general color/tone correction(no cleanup)  3. present state(WIP)

My main question is what to do with the spots and further cleanup in the non-essential areas. I would guess that it's no use trying to fake a pristine photograph here, so then the question is: how far into the direction of the faces should I smoothen the background? (and: are the faces too smooth? are they believable? am still refining the features, but can't do a whole lot more) I'm going to work on the hands and sweater some more. Should I also work more on the hair?
If spottiness should be lessened, how would you do that? Dodge and burn, like I did the faces?






BTW I really love this photograph. They're clearly goofing around, pushing against each other and having fun, while some mysterious hand offers the girl an apple.
(or is he holding a light meter?)

All tips are welcome!
Greetings from the Netherlands,

Axel Saffran

Mhayes

#1
Hi Axel,

Great to have you join OPR and post your work on the Forum. You have gone about restoring this photo in the right way by doing color correction first. One thing that is kind of tricky is that all of our photos are shot as sRGB, so they will have the three channels: red, blue, and green. Originally I'm pretty sure this was a black and white and was not a tinted photo and what you see is color due to age. Had this been a true color photo, the channels would have been more help to you. You have done a really good job of bringing the girl's face back. The boy shows more detail, but he is getting too dark as well is the background. I think the photo would look better as a black/white especially with it being a snow scene.

Here is what I would do. Take your original background and do another version. I would say take your current version, but the problem is that when you "dodge" and "burn" it is destructive and by that I mean you can't undo what you have done unless on a separate layer. I will show you another way that I think is better on this type of photo.

With the original duplicate the layer. Then do a Levels Adjustment--either the RGB channel or each individual channel. Then (assuming you are using PS with B/W option) do another Adjustment Layer--this time a B/W. I tried different ones and ended up going with the default. Next and I'm sure there are better ways to do this (like group folders), but I do a "Merge Visible" and that gives me a layer with my changes. Then I go up on the pull down at the top under "Layer" and choose "New." A pop up will come up and you have some choices--for mode, choose soft light or overlay (I like the first) and then check the little box at the bottom that says: Fill with Soft Light-neutral color (50% gray). You will notice that above your last layer you will be a layer that is gray, but has not changed your photo. Next pick a soft brush and make sure you have the black/white (foreground/background). You will look above and set the opacity low--trial and error--but for this try 20%--increase and decrease opacity as needed.  Since your foreground is black, that means that where you paint will darken with the gray and when you want to lightened, you will hit "X" on your keyboard for a shortcut that will reverse the order and now white will be first you will be lightening.

When I'm doing a WIP progress I remember to save, but I also may save versions in case I want to go back to what I have done before. I think the B/W will help you in some areas like the sky. Hope this helps and keep posting your WIP. Others may have a better way to tackle this one.

Looks like an apple to me too.  ::)

Margie

"carpe diem"

Margie Hayes
OPR President
[email protected]

Sampa

Hi Margie, thank you for your extensive reply. 

I agree that all color in the original was due to ageing. The color correction was indeed necessary therefor. Many thanks to Glennab for posting the technique with the eye droppers. Works great!
And it's funny, I'd actually done almost exactly what you describe next. I made a B/W adjustment layer and went for auto because it looked pretty good. (Then, however, took advantage of the handy tinting option and made it kind of orangey. Hence the warm look  :wow: Will upload an unt(a)inted final version, along with the warmer one. I thought it suited the way they interacted, but I can see what you mean with it being a snow scene).

BTW, I always dodge and burn on a 50% grey background set to either soft light or overlay so it must be very similar to what you describe. I'll also try this though, since the brush tool does work slightly differently.

So, you do think that the spots should be removed further, right? Like halfway gone, would that be enough?
And lightening the boy is probably a good idea. His suit is too dark. In the darker background areas, though, there's no definition besides damage/noise. Maybe the best way is to recreate definition in his jacket by dodging and leave the background (only soften the spots)?

Thanks again,

Axel

Mhayes

Hi Axel,

When you ask about removing the spots, which ones specifically? In the snow, not a problem to leave unless they look out of place, but if there are spots on the face and clothes, then maybe using the healing brush, patch tool, etc. When you post the next one, show us a B/W and what areas. Also, on the arm holding the apple (?) I would make the light part by the edge the same tone. On your second version it looks better on the house and the sky, where the tinted one seems to bring in more noise.

Margie
"carpe diem"

Margie Hayes
OPR President
[email protected]

G3User

Hi Axel,

You will always remember your first restoration, Margie's "Down Memory Lane" post caused me to look somewhere I wish I hadn't.

Your intermediate version I think looks better, there is a lot of nice detail in his clothes which is lost in the darker version. There is a added benefit, the "noise" in the background has lower contrast and is less noticeable. If you look at the histogram for your last image you can see that the blacks are crushed and that isn't helping.

Have you thought of running noise reduction on the background just to reduce but not eliminate the noise. You would probably need to exclude the boy and girl, there is a little texture in her jumper that it would be nice to preserve but it is a try and see issue.

The faces look good, if in doubt about how far to go with them do a print. a very small amount of noise reduction or blurring might help

Athol

Sampa

Margie: I meant the spots on the entire image (they are distinguishable as spots on the white areas, in other parts they just cover up information) Okay, good to know that it's not absolutely necessary to remove them all on areas like the snow. Will also make the snow one tone.

Athol: Yes, the darker version does enhance the noise. I just hadn't got around to that. First I wanted to know how far I should go. I agree that (especially) the suit is now too dark. Have been concentrating on reconstructing her face so much, that I'd for now calibrated the tone on her face, which was the lightest (most washed out) part of the image. And I have to admit that I hadn't payed enough attention to the histogram. Had seen the dark tone mountain on the left, but as I said was concentrating on the girl for now. I might indeed slap a curves adj. layer on it again, to lighten the whole image. Just a bit.
And pay special attention to his jacket because that would just be a black blot when printed like this.

I think that there are 3 things going on as far as damage:
1. the fading, which is pretty much removed.(too much in the darker parts)
2. the many white scratches, of which the main ones are removed on the latest version.
3. the dark spots.
To remedy the spots,  they have to be removed, not blurred. I'd tested blurring manually as well as with gaussian blur painted in with a mask. But it just became murky. I might use a tiny bit of blur as Athol suggested. Will also test noise reduction, just to see.
I guess the only way to really work towards recovering the original, is to manually lighten the dark spots where needed. I've got some idea now as to how far to go.

Thank you for your input. It helped me clarify things. I'll get to it now, and will post the result.

Axel

Mhayes

Axel,

Make a copy of your WIP and then if you don't post the whole thing, then do crop of a certain spot you are referring to and post on the Forum. For instance the arm where it is too light is remedied by taking a section of the good part and moving over the bad and working with it. On spots when they are not too large the patch tool works well. Once we see how it is coming along we can better help.

Margie
"carpe diem"

Margie Hayes
OPR President
[email protected]

Sampa

Okay, here is what I consider my 'mostly finished' version.

Is there anything I overlooked?

I still think some tinting would do it good, though. It looks a bit cold like this.
Also, I'm not so sure anymore about the overall yellow hue in the original being solely the result of ageing.
Looks to me like faded sepia or something like that. But you guys probably have a better idea about that.
This is the second really old photograph I've analysed ever. Still... could it be?

Axel


Mhayes

#8
Axel,

I think you have done a great job on this and kept it looking like the old photo that it is and knowing it won't come back like the original in pristine shape, but a huge improvement over the damaged state. You may submit back a B/W and a sepia for QC to decide on (maybe both). One reason why it can be a big headache if not sure the original is sepia is because if there are a series of photos from that time frame and different volunteers; you get different variations of sepia. Yes, this picture looks cold, but it is a snow scene and they do look cold.

I played around with your version and in some places I got a little sloopy. I filled in with trees at the top because I thought that looked like damage rather than sunlight streaming through. I also repaired the sweater, some parts on the girl's skirt, the boy's pants. I also lighten the boy's face and his shirt. The one thing I wasn't sure of was the three curved dots above his pants were damage or what?

Nice work!



Margie
"carpe diem"

Margie Hayes
OPR President
[email protected]

Sampa

Ah, I see what you mean about differently tinted final results, Margie.
Will upload both.

Nice to see your version. Planting those trees in the background makes a big difference. Makes it look much more quiet and clear. I hadn't really thought about that spot very much, but assumed it to be legit and untouchable, since it seems to go behind the girl's head. Now that I look at it some more, I actually think it's a snowy slope we're looking at... just less trees in that part. I think I should keep it, shouldn't I? I mean, it does look better, but the owners of this image might know this location (maybe even live in that house we see?) and therefor might not appreciate me changing their scenery  ;D

I'll fix the girl's dress like you did, and the boy's trousers. And especially the boy's face is much better when lit a bit and he's got a clean shirt on. And yeah, those three white dots had me wondering too. I figured that they do add some nice detail, and since they are so evenly distributed as if draped over a bulge, I just declared them a feature.

Thanks for your work on this, Margie! I'll add the finishing touches, and then go and look for a new project. I'm quite enjoying this restoration work.

Axel

Mhayes

#10
Axel,

It becomes a case of perspective from both of our point of views. I'm not ruling out that it could be a snowy slope behind, but above the girl's head the trees look like they are in the foreground--so you wouldn't see the streaks of snow breaking up the pattern on the trees. Plus, it looks as if the trees are leaning horizontal. If I look at the photo at a higher magnification and see the trees at the bottom between the girl and boy; I want to make them the same height as the others. I found by leaving it as is that is really distracts from the girl and maybe the family wouldn't like the scenery changed, but chances are the photo holds more meaning with the boy and girl.

So verdict out on that one.  :cool:

Margie
"carpe diem"

Margie Hayes
OPR President
[email protected]

Sampa

Margie,

To my eye, the trees left are behind the mountain and faded due to atmospheric perspective (unlike the trees to the right). But the your result looks quite convincing anyway, and there is no question that the people are most important.
Trees it's going to be...  :)

Axel

Mhayes

Axel,

Ah, the power of persuasion.  ;)

Margie
"carpe diem"

Margie Hayes
OPR President
[email protected]