What is It?

[glennab]

Hi Margie

I don't discern any real color in the photo other than the damage.  I'd channel mix to get the best black & white you can, repair it, and then give it a sepia tone.  It's an old enough photo that I'd think sepia would be very attractive.  And I still think the scallops are part of the quilt.  It's too symmetrical to be anything else -- besides which, as I said before, that's a common quilt border.

Do you think it would be possible to mask out the baby where he or she is more naturally shaded and then try to color correct the rest of the photo based on the shades only in the damaged area?  I'm not certain it would help, but it might be worth a try.

Brave restorer for taking this one on!

Cheers,

Glenna

[Mhayes]

Hi Glenna,

I tried do a channel mix and maybe I could have moved the sliders to get less of the damaged blue channel. I tried even going into LAB and using the lightness channel to use for black and white. My best attempt was using Calculations and duplicating the red channel with a soft light blend. It came out brighter and looked the best. After I finish I will propably change it to a sepia tone unless I find out the photo was in color. 

Believe it or not, the baby's face is probably the easiest to work with compared to the rest of the photo. The little girl's is more of a challenge. Once you get in black and white, it is so much easier than dealing with color. Yes I have done a lot of masking and some times working on several different layers masks to see what looks best. I tried to color correct but with strange results.

I think you are right about the scalloping on the quilt. There is a part where the flower meets the scalloping the same on both the right and left hand side of the baby.

Thanks again,

Margie

[Hannie]

Hi Margie,

I agree that there is only so much you can do to this photo without making it look painted.  The girl on the right is in worse shape than the baby, it would be easier if the baby was in worse shape.  It would give a more even result overall.
I selected the baby and did a little adjustment, it is a color photo, don't know it that is any help... :-\

Hannie

[Mhayes]

Hi Hannie,

Your color really looks nice, especially for the quilt. For some reason I can't seem to get that good a blue. I have done an auto color correction in Curves, a threshold correction to establish the white balance, and testing Levels on each of the channels to bring the sliders in. I also went into Lab to see if I could get the rich blue color you had in yours. The flower and trim never wanted to go blue. Looking at what you have done, looks like someone has taken a cloth and washed away the grime--wish it was that simple.  :)

Thanks,

Margie

[Hannie]

Yes Margie, unfortunately only the selected baby area can be adjusted that way, I used auto levels on the selection.  The quilt has a Delft Blue like coloring. No matter what  I tried, the "colors" are really bad in the area outside the selection.
You could make it grayscale and have the baby in color as an eyecatcher.   ::)

Hannie

[Mhayes]

Hannie that's a great idea about everything in grayscale except for the baby in color. I'll use the flashlight lightning filter in Photoshop with only the baby in the light. I'm sure that will get brownie points from QC.  ;D

Margie

[glennab]

Hannie & Margie, I wonder about the idea of keeping the baby in color and leaving everything else grayscale, only because that puts the little girl WAY in the background and diminishes her importance in the photo.  Aesthetically, your idea is great, but for the sake of the subjects, I'd be more inclined to keep it monotone.  I wish there were more color, because I'd love to see the quilt in its entirety – especially the hues.  I happen to love quilts and piecework, and considering the probable age of this photo, the quilt was most likely made completely by hand.  It's a work of art!

Hugs!

Glenna

[Mhayes]

Hi Glenna,

I think we were both kidding about doing the baby in color and the rest in grayscale. I agree with what you are saying but have not yet decided whether to abandon the color.

Margie

[Hannie]

Hi Glenna,

When I suggested the color/grayscale combination I had in mind those (horrible) attempts a seemingly modern photos that you see sometimes, so yes, I was only kidding too!
What remains though is that Margie is restoring a photo that has about 1 square inch of almost perfect detail and the rest is beyond repair.  I find those type of photos always the hardest to do because if you don't want to loose any detail and don't go for the painted look the result will always look odd.  I much rather restore a photo that has bad damage all over then you can try to pull out any little detail left and smooth out the rest.

Hannie

[Mhayes]

The title of this topic should have been: Where is It? It has taken me so long that when I try to post; I get a warning that this is an topic past 30 days and I should consider starting a new topic..  :-[ This is another one of those photos that the more you work on it, the worse it gets. It still has some  :funny: places that still need repairing, but I am really at the end of my rope on this one. I am posting two different versions: sepia and color. The sepia is more of a white flag to signal I've given up on the color. Since my last post, there are a couple of things that I have learned from the owner of the photo. The pattern on the chair is part of cushion and not a quilt. The young girl has brown hair and eyes. They also believe that the chair has arms, as well as the baby.  I tried working on getting the young girl's hair brown and while the hair didn't look so bad, it didn't look right on the girl. I also worked on her eyes, but that changed her looks also. Please someone put me out of my misery on this one!

Margie

[Hannie]

Hi Marie,

Great job on an impossible photo!  I think the sepia colored one looks a little better than  the colored one.  Maybe if the baby has a little more blur to match the rest of the photo and a little shadow on the girls arms, legs and dress could help?  I did a real fast sloppy job to show you what I mean.
Anyway, your restoration looks a lot better than the original!

:loveit:

Hannie

[Mhayes]

Hi Hannie,

Thanks for the help! This makes me wonder if I could have saved a ton of time by scraping the idea of doing this in color. The blurring did tie it all together, instead of having the baby and some of the surrounding area shaper than the girl. I will also go in and add some roundness to the baby's leg near the girl so that it doesn't look so chopped off. What is so sad about this picture is that it is the little girl that was so important to restore. She is the mother to the owner of this picture. The baby is her aunt, who I believe is still living, since she was going to check to see if she had a copy of this picture. She said when they left their house they put this picture on a top shelf thinking it would be safe--turns out it wasn't.

:hug:

Margie

[Tess (Tassie D)]

I think you've done the best you can Margie. Every time I see this photo I want to grab a cloth and wipe the grime off it. :)  If only.  ::)

[Mhayes]

Tess, I know what you mean, too bad it wasn't that easy. Even though it is not funny, I had to smile when the owner asked me if there was a pattern on the girl's dress. There might have been before the damage, but afterwards there was nothing but a mass of white, dirty brown and gray spots.

Margie

[jneil2]

Amazing job, Margie.  The lady will be so pleased.  I wish I had the skills you do!  I have a lot to learn, and this forum is the best!

Jan