When I say pixel pushing I mean pixelpushing!

[Hannie]

Good evening everyone,

I should have posted earlier on with my latest project.  I seem to be a little stuck and not sure what to do.  This photo is one of the very early ones that Chris recently posted in her gallery.

The original is very large (>9"x14") and the damage is complete, no info in any channel of the missing parts.  It looks like the photo was printed on canvas. I have been working on this one for the last 2 weeks for 1 to 2 hours a day(!).  Don't be mislead by the result you see in this small image because it is still not nearly done.  Even after working on the photo all this time it still looks terrible when viewed at printing size.

Should I continue with this photo as I have been it will take a very long time (I'm talking months at the rate I'm going) before I'm done.  On the other hand if I reduce the image size (say 6x10) I could work a little faster and spend a more realistic amount of time on this photo.

Well, it's bed time over here so I think I'll say goodnight!

Hannie

[weewood]

Hannie,,,You sure have been pushing the pixels. I think a little shadowing on the lapel and collar might help. And, the eyes don't seem quite right. Other than that, I'll say "sweet dreams" Regards. David

[Hannie]

It is very a warm and muggy night in Amsterdam and I can't sleep, back to the drawing board for a little while, maybe it helps!

You're right David, I still have a lot of work to do on this one, the lapels need to be redone and the eyes as well.  Actually almost the whole photo still needs a lot of working on.  All I have been doing so far is cloning detail back into the white areas from the surrounding areas.  I'm just wondering if I should keep the photo the same size or not.

Have a nice evening!

Hannie

[mschonher]

Hannie, this is looking amazingly good considering the amount and kind of damage you're dealing with.  You probably just need a break.  I've got a "stinker" myself and I'm just about ready to put it back into Margie's gallery after 7 different tries.  You have my sympathy but I think you're doing great!

Mary

[Ausimax]

Hi Hannie,

You are doing a great job on this one, Only needs the texture evening out mainly on the face, remember they may still show damage after restoration.

Re the size. Check in the file info and see if it lists the size there, some of these old ones I have done have been extremely large files and in the image size showed as being 9x14 yet when you look in the file info they are only 4x6 or 8x10, just one of Mike's little tricks to keep us on our toes.


Max

[Hannie]

Thank you Max and Mary for the encouragement!  I checked the file info and it said "first 3 8x10.grad 5x7" in the description which doesn't seem right.  Image size is around 2900x4300 at 300 dpi, very large.

A lot of the damage in the photo is very regular in shape but unfortunately the FFT filter will not work on this one!  I have been working in pixel size, moving them into to fill in the white areas.  Not a very good method with a photo this size.  :-\

Hannie

[Pelican]

Wow! This is some kind of screening in the original. With the hexagonal pattern its like an old transfer from slide to print but at this print size, it can't be that. The damage picked up the screen pattern and holy moly! There should be a find similar function in PS. With as tiny as what the screen pattern is. I would just clone as usual and imho the larger the pic, the easier to do it well. (eg: If I have a pic less than 5x7, I bump it to 600dpi just so I have more to work.)

I don't understand the print sizes in some of the old ones either?????

[Ausimax]

Hannie, I'm working on a Kellum one at present, same sort of damage, honeycomb pattern, I think it is a transfer from something else, it isn't consistent enough to be textured paper. I found the FFT filter wouldn't do much for it but I got rid of most of it with Median filter.

Re, the size, as these photos aren't properly numbered its hard to tell which you have, but mine isn't a graduation photo so I'm working on the assumption it is 8x10 - yours could be a graduation photo so it may only be 5x7, to check go to Image/Image Size and change the width value to 5" if the height value changes to 7" it should be that size (don't change the size) but you should be able to work on optimising the photo for 5x7.

Hope this helps some, other than that check with Chris as to which photo you have.


Max

[cmpentecost]

Thanks for the pointers on this Max.  This has been one of the major problems of these older photos is trying to determine the correct photo size.  It should either be an 8x10 or 5x7.  You could also set your crop parameters to 8x10 at 300, and see if it fits, or 5x7 @ 300 to see if it fits.  Because this photo has "03" on it, my guess is that it may be an 8x10.  And, if all else fails, leave as is, and I can see what I can do when you send it back.

Thanks :o)

Chris

[Hannie]

Max, thank you for the tips on size info.  I tried them and none fit this photo.  This is also one of the Kellum photos but it has consistent honeycomb pattern/damage all over the image.  That is the reason I was so surprised that the FFT filter didn't show any star pattern.
I will have a go at your Median method, maybe it'll work for this one too.

Christine, the 5x7" ratio fits this photo the best, should I make the it that size?  With 8x10 the photo loses substantial length.

Hannie

[cmpentecost]

Hi Hannie,

5x7 is fine.  I've often had to guess at these older photos, based on notes and "what seems to fit the best".  Thanks!

Chris

[Hannie]

Thanks Chris!

Hannie