Here's a question:
This pic was oddly retouched before it was damaged (white collar, white glasses, erratic paint job on face, near neck).
(https://s19.postimg.cc/t377wuj27/Joseph_S_20_01_9x14orig.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/t377wuj27/)
Should I leave the retouching, like this:
(https://s19.postimg.cc/9lckgugyn/Joseph_S_20_01_WIP.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/9lckgugyn/)
Or should I fix it, like this?
(https://s19.postimg.cc/6r9f3l9pb/Joseph_S_20_01-repainted.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/6r9f3l9pb/)
No offense seelcraft, but I like the damaged photo better. I guess you could call it retouched, but I think it was photo that looks to be hand painted over the original photo.To say that it has erratic paint job is kind of forgetting that this photo was in flood water, don't you think? It also looks like it might be on some kind of card stock. Because of the hand painting, color correcting like you would do for a normal photo is not going to work. The lace--the lace looks too borrowed and way too sharp--and the dress I'm okay with a start, but not her face and how dark it is. The white on the bottom of her frames could be toned down, but I wouldn't make her glasses black.
Margie
That's what I thought about the picture, too. I have a few in the cedar chest that have been hand painted.
I agree with Margie..tough one..