Spots Before My Eyes . . .

[lurch]

 . . . in spades! I think I'm done, but need the eagle-eye crew to check for me. What have I missed? This was really a fiddly one, and I had to keep reminding myself it was only a 3.5 x 3.5.

original:


wip:


In particular, I do hope that rectangular thingy at viewer left is something real, 'cause if it's not there's no hope of reconstructing what's behind it.

[glennab]

Hi lurch

It's way past my bedtime, and I just lost the image I pulled up using my favorite: Calculations.  I was able to get a bit more detail by doing the following:  I went to Calculations, mixed the green and blue channels set to multiply.  Copied the Alpha channel and made a layer that I also multiplied, then copied and multiplied again.  Brought down the opacity of the third layer until I could see detail, then flattened the image and adjusted the levels.  For each channel you'll have to move the sliders considerably to the left.  There's very little information on the right in any channel.  That's where I'd start working.  Your restoration looks blurred to me.

I decided to replicate what I did so you'd have a sample.  For what it's worth, here it is.  And as best I can tell, unfortunately the white glob on the lower left is damage, but it's difficult to make out the detail behind it.



G'luck, & goodnight

GK

[Hannie]

Hi Lurch,

You have done an amazing job getting this photo back to life!
If I understand well, you mean the white rectangular thing on the left just like there is something similar on the right?  What you did to that area looks fine to me.

The blur that Glenna mentioned appears to be less after a little adjustment in the levels. 
Lurch, your image is on the right with , minor levels adjustment only and on the left is Glenna's version also with some levels adjustment.

 

The blur doesn't look so bad now and seems to be part of the original photo.

:up2:

Hannie

[Mhayes]

Wow! Great job everyone as this is a big improvement!!  :up:

Margie

[glennab]

Absolutely love the team efforts.  One thing I forgot to mention is that I think the "dots" are damage.  I studied them for a while, and couldn't recognize anything that looked like image. If they aren't damage, what are they?

Lurch, I think your cleanup is great.  The only thing that makes me prefer the calculations version is that there's more fine detail.  That begs the question of whether any of that detail with be evident when printed, especially on such a small photo.  Distributors? I'd like to think that trying to glean succinct features isn't an exercise in futility - or to know not to worry about them if they aren't going to print anyway.

If Iron Man sees the time that I sent my last post, he'll go into "Drill Sergeant" mode.  At around 10pm he pokes his head into my office and announces that "anyone with any sense will be going to bed now."  "OK, you go, Dude! I have an ear to construct."

BTW, I was able to go to photos.com and download FPO copies of 6 or 7 ears.  I got the general shape & size from Hannie's brilliant extraction, but I needed more detail.  The images were small, but worked perfectly for visual aids.

Cheers

GK

[lurch]

GK, I think the dots are some kind of flowery garland, based on the apparent reflections in the mirror. This house seems to have had lots of those. Maybe the GHF folks can provide some insight. I'll happily take them out if they are indeed damage.

And I'll try calculations on another, bigger image. Love 'em! Probably would have gone that route on this one if I hadn't gotten preoccupied with trying to find an easy way to deal with that dark streak along the lower third. As it was (as usual) I spent far more time trying to find the easy way out than it would have taken to do it by brute force, which I ended up doing anyway :( Oh, well . . . that's how we learn, right?

[Mhayes]

GK, Lurch is right that the spots are not damage but a garland of paper roses. Those who have done very many photos for GHF learned real quick about the paper roses.

Margie

[glennab]

Okay, paper roses it is!  I'll defer to the experts!  Lurch, you're so right about all of this being a learning process.  I think it's one reason I so love what we do.  We each have our own way of looking at and repairing these images, and I've enjoyed getting new perspectives when we're all working on the same photo.  Good exercise for the brain cells!  I'll be so sure I'm looking at a specific object, and one of you will see something different, and then I can see it as well.  In this particular instance, I'm just amazed at how much detail came out of the original mess. I'd call it a masterpiece!

Hugs, all

GK