I'm having some trouble figuring out what else is in this picture. I have determined that there is a lamp next to him. There is chair next to his hand. He's holding some flowers. There just isn't enough detail though to really pull them all out.
Thanks,
Curtis
Before
(http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s108/Pelican00007/NourseB_36_35_8x10800orig.jpg)
So far..
(http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s108/Pelican00007/NourseB_36_35_8x10800awip.jpg)
Hi Curtis,
Welcome to the OPR forums! Whew....this is tough one. I downloaded it and looked at all of the channels, from RGB to LAB to CMYK and nothing at all came thru as being visible/useful information. It will be interesting what the others have to say!
I know you are far from done, but I'd guess his shirt/vest are white, and using a mask or selection and hue/saturation, you could bring back the white. Also, I'm not so sure about the part in his hair. I'm wondering if he might have more of a curly head of hair with no part line.
Considering where you've started, you've made a fabulous start! I'll look forward to seeing your progress on this!
Christine
Hi Curtis, welcome to the forum! Great job you did, it is coming along really well. I think you got about all there is to find on detail in this photo. It is just a matter of cleaning up some more and maybe a little levels/color adjustment. The photo probably wasn't too good to start with so there is only so much you can do at this stage.
Well done!
Hannie
Hi Christine, Hi Hannie,
Yeah, I'm not to sure about the hair either. There was so much junk in it that it was hard to tell. By the time I got it out of there, you couldn't tell it was hair at all. I'll work that some more as well as some of the other adjustments.
Welcome to OPR.
A natural light portrait! I love it. It reminds me of the dinner scenes in Stanley Kubrick's "Barry Lyndon" when natural light photography was first used in movie.
The photo may be darkened and yellowed from aging and damage but I believe the original was not bright and has a warm hue from the incandescent light source coming mostly from the right hand side of this handsome guy.
There could have been one or two spot lights on the wall above the lamps.
You are doing well cleaning it. I would suggest that you blur the background a little bit. The contrast of the brightnesses of the wall seemed disappeared going toward the ceiling. As the lower left corner of the photo, I would leave it blur.
Hi Curtis, welcome to the forum.
Great job on the pic so far. :up: I see the hair more along these lines (very rough sketch).
(http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c5/tassie_devil/OPR/hair.jpg)
Thanks Tassie. Now that you draw it out, thats similar to what I thought I saw. For now I just took the part out but I'm gonna give the hair another go.
Thats what I thought too schen. It looked more like it already had a tungsten glow to it.
This pic is frustrating in that is has mystery pixels. You start trying to make an adjustment and as one part of the area you're working on starts doing what you want, another starts to saturate with blue or yellow.
I got a little color into his face but then the shaded side starts to turn blue.
Is the shirt and vest too loud? Anything less than that has yellow splotches all over it.
I blurred the background a little and the corner a lot. Its all on separate layers so I can change it.
(http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s108/Pelican00007/NourseB_36_35_8x10800bwip.jpg)
Hi Curtis, and a huge welcome to the forum.
You're either brave, foolhardy or really good at restorations to have picked this guy. I've been playing around with the image's channels, and when I converted to CMYK, used Calculations and only mixed the cyan and black, I was able to come up with interesting detail depending on the blending mode. In some instances more detail showed on the darker side, and in others more appeared out of the blown out area. I combined them and made a couple of mixed channels, copied them in as layers, and then got stumped.
However, that said, I think if you have any expertise in blending modes you might be able to get your information in a similar manner. The yellow and magenta channels offer very little information, so I'd hesitate to even use them separately. But I suspect that blending the original, the blue and black calculations channels in several configurations and blending the channels as layers, you might get more detail. Channel mixer with only the cyan and black might be worth a try as well.
I hope I haven't totally confused you, but I keep looking at the information in the combined channels and going Hmmmmmmmm...
Anyway, give it a try. Can't hurt.
Cheers,
Glenna
Curtis,
You are making great progress!
Yes, I agree the shirt and vest are too bright and too white. A tungsten orange glow on them might look better.
As for the mysterious pixels, I use two methods to tackle them:
1. make a copy of the image layer; pick an area and make adjust only for that area; use mask to merge only the area you picked; repeat for other areas.
2. While in RGB mode, select Blue Channel; click the eye of RGB to make all three channels visible (but only blue is selected); use about 5% dodge/burn tools to adjust the color, the color will go between yellow-orange to pink-blue.
If these are confusing, let me know and I will explain them in more details.
Shujen
Hi Curtis,
Hard to find detail in the damaged area - I agree with Shujen about the colour, the shirt is much too bright in your last post,and it is obviously a natural light photo, go with the tungsten glow.
I tried it in all colour modes trying to bring out detail, this is Multichannel, Alpha channel inverted and adjusted with levels.
Could those two bright spots to the right (our left) of the lamp be candles? I kept finding the hint of lights with a seemingly solid stem below in other mode/channels but this seems to give them actual substance.
Doesn't seem to help with much else though. :-\
(http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/4374/alpha1lw0.jpg)
Have fun,
Max
Nice pick up Max. They sure look like candles.
I think the piece that is in front of the lower part of his jacket appears to be a gladiolus and carnation flower arrangement? Maybe on top of a piano or something as schen said it looks like a restaurant setting.
Yeah, but candles just didn't make sense to me. There is too much light being cast on his face for that. What I see is on the left light pillar (we'll call it), there are horizontal lines as if it were a light shining through a taffeta shade and on the right one a distinct hard line the shape of a shade as if that light source was coming from behind.
You have all been very helpful. What a great welcome!
Those are definitely mums and glads in his hand and whatever his hand is resting on, there appears to be a lamp there and a chair . The details are so sketchy though.
Here he is with the shirt and vest only brightened a little, a few more skin tones and a new hairdo
(http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s108/Pelican00007/NourseB_36_35_8x10800cwip.jpg)
Welcome curtis,I'd like to throw my hat in the ring, for what it's worth :)
What I see is a mirror behind the lamp,with the reflection of the lamp and the reflection of some kind of wall light from the opposite wall.
I could be totally wrong about that, but my 2 cents.
Regards Vicki.
I considered the mirror idea too..... :-\
Pelican, some things never come to light :funny: but you're coming along well. I'm a Mum and I would know!
Ok, bad puns!
Welcome to the nut house :)
Candice
Candy, you're a hoot! I love puns.
It's Ms Gotta-be-different here. The flowers I can discern look like peonies (they're fuller than mums) and small calla lilies (the thin, small flower protruding from the arrangement. I don't think he's holding the flowers. Judging by his stance, I believe he's leaning with his hand on the table and the flowers are just in front of his hand and forearm.
Curtis, you're doing a fine job on a tough one. I downloaded your last iteration and duplicated the layer with about a 30% multiply blending mode, and his visage became a bit clearer. Might be worth trying that and masking the areas that are too dark.
Cheers
Glenna
I've gotten a look of good input on this but I'm not sure how much better I can make it.
Glenna, that multiply layer did help a little and btw, stupidity can easily be mistaken as being brave, foolhardiness goes right along with it, but one thing I've never been afraid of is a photograph.
Anyway, heres what I have. Tell me if it needs more. :) This being my first here, I'm not sure...
(http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s108/Pelican00007/NourseB_36_35_8x10800dwip.jpg)
Hi Curtis,
For my money it looks great, I don't see you can do much more with it, if you can't see it, you can't fix it.
The only suggestion I would make is to get rid of the light coloured artifact near the edge of his suit, not the flower stem but below that, even if it is an original article it pulls the eye straight to the area of damage and away from the subject.
Max
Awesome job, Curtis.
I see only 3 things that bother me: the splotches of yellow that don't seem to belong, as in the area Max mentioned and on his vest. I don't know if you could use selective color to diminish the uneven cast (i.e. remove some yellow from the whites and neutrals.). In the arched area I can see spots of obvious cloning – a few passes with the patch tool would take care of that. And I'd do a slight burn on his suit where it's gray-ish looking.
It's great to have you participating in the forum! The posts and troubleshooting are so educational. I can't wait to see your next project.
Bless!
Glenna
An afterthought: it bothers me that his eyes are so difficult to see, since he's such a handsome guy. I don't know if this would work, but do you think a very gentle burn might bring out any detail – or at least some depth? I know you didn't have much with which to work in the first place.
Yes Max, I interpreted that as some hardware on a piece of luggage on the floor behind him. That I can kill, but I'm seeing that doing so brings the lower blossom to its left in as a focal point as well. I'll diminish that too I think, just a little.
Quote from: glennab on February 12, 2008, 10:58:44 PM
Awesome job, Curtis.
I see only 3 things that bother me: the splotches of yellow that don't seem to belong, as in the area Max mentioned and on his vest. I don't know if you could use selective color to diminish the uneven cast (i.e. remove some yellow from the whites and neutrals.). In the arched area I can see spots of obvious cloning – a few passes with the patch tool would take care of that. And I'd do a slight burn on his suit where it's gray-ish looking.
It's great to have you participating in the forum! The posts and troubleshooting are so educational. I can't wait to see your next project.
Bless!
Glenna
An afterthought: it bothers me that his eyes are so difficult to see, since he's such a handsome guy. I don't know if this would work, but do you think a very gentle burn might bring out any detail – or at least some depth? I know you didn't have much with which to work in the first place.
The splotches you see may be due to compression in my post but as I said earlier, yellow and blue splotches have been a nightmare in this pic. The vest has a hue/sat layer to just brighten it a bit (10% opacity....more stinks) and a selective color on top that I actually named "kill Yellow".
You're right! I thought I fixed all my clone marks.
The bright spot on his suit is from the light source on his face and I have burned the daylights out of it. I can lightly clone in some suit color. It bothers me a bit too.
Hi Pelican,
This has turned out really nice! I like how his hand, which we really don't know what he has there, blends in nicely to the rest of the photo. You've made a nice transition there so that it doesn't take away from the photo. Not being able to go back and see the original as I type this, but perhaps a subtle curves adjustment just to make him pop out of the photo a bit more? Then again, if it's the same as the original, then we want to give them back the same image. Glenna does have a good point about the eyes, but look closely at the original, and if his eyes are the same, then don't change them. It's hard sometimes when we have the skill to drastically improve an image, but yet again, our goal is to give them back what they had....with a few exceptions!
Nice work Pelican!
Christine
Oh, and his eyes.
Everything is so artifacted...I drew a few lines in but I didn't want to try and interpret them. I'm a pretty good artist, but you look at what you see in the smaller view and then try to zoom in and actually draw it. The family might be left wondering who that is. Eyes are very important and even if they don't look that good, its better than wrong.
I'll try to punch them out a bit with a burn and see what happens. Not much to work with though.
Thanks! :)
Quote from: cmpentecost on February 12, 2008, 11:58:02 PM
Hi Pelican,
This has turned out really nice! I like how his hand, which we really don't know what he has there, blends in nicely to the rest of the photo. You've made a nice transition there so that it doesn't take away from the photo. Not being able to go back and see the original as I type this, but perhaps a subtle curves adjustment just to make him pop out of the photo a bit more? Then again, if it's the same as the original, then we want to give them back the same image. Glenna does have a good point about the eyes, but look closely at the original, and if his eyes are the same, then don't change them. It's hard sometimes when we have the skill to drastically improve an image, but yet again, our goal is to give them back what they had....with a few exceptions!
Nice work Pelican!
Christine
Oops! Christine,
You snuck in will I was remembering to post to Glenna's after thoughts.
It does have an overall definition issue. I'll deal with it as best I can. Thanks for all the input!! :up2:
Okay, I uploaded the jpg at about 4mb. If you need the psd, I've tidied it down to 76mb.
Question: Does the uploader automatically go to the right place? It just looks (as someone said) like an ftp. It won't let me look at its help files.
Hi Pelican,
Uploading it in jpg is the best way to do it. Don't worry about file size. We can handle it....it's more a matter if your computer and internet can handle it. I know this is Jan's photo, but I just looked at photoshelter, and the upload was successful!
Great job Pelican!
Christine
Thanks Christine,
Lols a little at the file size comments. My last job required cmyk tiff's or the printer found them useless. It was a burden on my memory and the archives need to be purged, really bad! :knuppel:
Looking for a new picture...:)
I know that the ultimate best photo would be printed totally uncompressed, etc. I wish we could do that, but we have limited resources and man/woman power to do that. As someone who does a lot of photography and prints out a lot of photos, I'm quite particular on the quality and coloring of a photo. However, as some of my family and friends have said, I see twice as much as they do. I spend hours a day at this stuff, yet my friends who use Point and Shoot cameras think the 1-hour processing of photos are perfect. What is the saying..."beauty is in the eye of the beholder"?
I really appreciate your insight into this Pelican. That's what makes a great artist! Thanks so much!
Christine
You're welcome
Sad thing is, I was doing pics for an industrial catalog.
I think that a couple of years ago, someone said, "Hey, let's try printing a jpg." History was made and life is a whole lot simpler now.
My family photos may be bmp's from scan to print but thats just me. :loveit:
C
The core of JPEG compression algorithm is the "perceptual encoding" that eliminates the minute variations NOT perceivable by human being. There are people who believe "beauty is in the pixel resolution". Well, Arizona Highways Magazine finally gave in and accepts submission of digital photo. But they have to be 5400x3600 or higher resolution in lossless compression TIFF format.
Having say that, I store my family photos in 3,872 x 2,592 RAW format. :-[
Pelican, I think you did a remarkable job on this very difficult photo. I'm amazed that it looks so good. Great work :up2:
Mary
Thanks Mary!
Thanks everybody!! :)