Give me some ice cream!!

[Marydh]

What do you think? Not sure about the arm and skin color.
Would appreciate any input.
Thanks,
Mary


 

[Jo Ann Snover]

Fun image! I think the skin in your first take on this is a bit too yellow and a bit too bright - the overall color looks right in the damaged original and is just a little too dark.

Not sure how you lightened it, but if you used a curves or levels adjustment layer, you could either mask parts of it or lower the opacity to reduce the effect. I used a Hue/Saturation adjustment layer to tone down the reds and yellows and masked it just for the skin. My edits were really sketchy, but I hope you get the idea.

I think the arm isn't quite the right shape - it's really hard to tell given the damage, but take a look at a very quick edit I did on your small version, plus some reference images from stock previews of elbows in the sort of position this boy's is:



The edge of the boy's arm needs to be very soft where it's over the grass - once you're happy with the shape, the hard edge will have to be blurred a bit.

Also, in the cloned grass, you have some hard vertical edges - I assume you hit the edge of the image in the source area - which will need to be removed.

[Marydh]

Hi Jo Ann,
Thanks so much for all the tips. I hope he looks better now.  Let me know what you think.
Mary

[Jo Ann Snover]

I think the arm position does look much better in this version.

The palm of the hand, below the thumb, has increased in size, obscuring more of the boy's eyelid than in the original. I think that should match the original (if you overlay a masked original showing just the hand on your edited version, you'll see the change clearly).

[Marydh]

Another try.  Changed the arm a bit also.
I have a general question.  If we are supposed to do color correction in the beginning why would I change
the skin color later?
Thanks,
Mary

[Mhayes]

Mary, definitely at the beginning, later would be tweaking. Great job!

[Jo Ann Snover]

I think that looks a lot better - arm shape looks right and colors seem much more realistic to me.

As far as the color work being done at the beginning, I know that's what the OPR guidelines say, but I think they were written before non-destructive editing was widely used. If you edit non-destructively - separating pixel edits from color, tone, contrast, etc. - you can alter colors at any time without redoing anything.

I just saw Margie's post, and I don't want to sound argumentative, but I don't see any downside to non-destructive editing, and see many upsides.

One additional upside of using a stack of adjustment layers for color is that you can get consistency over a set of images that were all shot at the same time in the same lighting and have suffered similar fading. Like a set of wedding images or bar/bat mitzvah images. You just drag the set of adjustment layers to the next image and the colors will then match (with a few minor adjustments if one is lighter or darker). The only thing you have to replace are the masks, if any.

[Lynnya]

Great job Mary  :up: :up: :up:

[Marydh]

Thanks everyone.  I'll send the little guy on.
Mary

[Shadow]

Really nice Mary!

[Hannie]

Beautiful restore Mary!  :up2:

Jo Ann, I understand what Margie means by "tweaking afterwards":  I am one of those volunteers that have a chaotic workflow, let alone use Smart Objects.  It is better then to do color correction first and if necessary tweak later. 
A drawback of waiting to do color correction later is that earlier repairs may show up as spots.

[Lynnya]

Amen to that! When I first started I used to try to color correct near the end with DISASTROUS results.. that's probably cos like Hannie my layers and work flow look like an hallucination  :funny:  I do tweak at the end tho.. 

[Jo Ann Snover]

...A drawback of waiting to do color correction later is that earlier repairs may show up as spots.

Only if you mix pixel layers with adjustment layers, which is a no-no if you're trying to go the non-destructive route. You could view that as the canary in the coal mine - the alert that you're doing something you shouldn't :)

I would agree that if workflow is not organized, the non-destructive approach isn't a great fit. I guess the trick is to figure out which kind of approach is right for how you work, but I do think it's easier to get organized than one might imagine...

I am not a fan of Smart Objects, but I think their usefulness is greater if you're doing creative work that uses a cascade of pixel edits that depend upon one another, where they can be a life saver.

Here endeth the marketing pitch for non-destructive editing (for this post anyway :) )!

[Lynnya]

Hi Jo Ann,

I would be interested to see a "normal" workflow of one of your restores.. I don't know if I have the where withal to "not" have my pixel layers and adjustment layers all mixed up.. I'm self taught (with a ton of tutorials) and I am eternally messy but would like to be "more organised" ..
If it would be easier for you, you could post a photoshop file that I could download..
Thanks for input.
Lynn

[Jo Ann Snover]

I assume it's OK to share a link to this PSD file on my Google Drive - if not I can edit the post and remove it. The file isn't public (i.e. won't show up in a Google search) as you need the link to download it.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=14d7OGRzsXZRwhGktV9b5T4BvY2Rq9WOz

Here's a (rough) explanation of the file. I hope it's enough of an overview to give you an idea - and if you mess with the file and turn layers on or off (or alter any of the adjustment layers) you can see how flexible it is if you need to make changes along the way.

You never edit the background layer in any way.