collapse

* Recent Topics

Working on Photos Coming! by Shadow
[September 19, 2022, 03:47:48 PM]


Happy Birthday Jonas by Shadow
[September 05, 2022, 05:20:38 PM]


Upgrade to Monterey by philbach
[August 20, 2022, 09:57:29 AM]


blue by Mhayes
[August 17, 2022, 07:26:26 PM]


Happy Birthday Margie by Shadow
[July 25, 2022, 06:46:40 PM]


Cool down :) by Mhayes
[July 20, 2022, 11:38:18 PM]


Just Checking In! by Hannie
[July 20, 2022, 02:17:31 AM]


Type Tool by Mhayes
[June 24, 2022, 09:52:47 PM]


Helping Andover, KS by Candice
[May 12, 2022, 05:04:22 PM]


Ruler TOOL by Hannie
[May 09, 2022, 07:08:32 AM]

Author Topic: Baby in Gingham  (Read 3310 times)

Offline philbach

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
Baby in Gingham
« on: November 14, 2021, 08:42:14 AM »
Hi I am working on this at present.  I separated the subject from the background to prevent confusion.  Let me know what you think I should do to improve this project.  And later what to do with the background.  Thanks



phil

Offline Shadow

  • Board Moderator
  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2656
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2021, 05:57:44 PM »
Wow Phil. Nice separation from the background. This one is beyond me. Good luck!

Offline Lynnya

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2714
    • Atmospheres Photography
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2021, 06:05:26 PM »
Tough one Phil..lots of color casts to fix. I dont know..may reduce the cast with a hue sat targeting the yellows first then the blue and paint back in the correct skin tone..I'll try it this end and see what happens ..I would make a duplicate copy and test all sorts of ideas that pop into your head..cant hurt.
never giving up......learning from others as I go...

Offline Mhayes

  • Site Admin
  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 6110
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2021, 06:29:36 PM »
Phil, no kidding about this one being difficult. You're right that the background will have to be different and right now not sure which way to go. No sure there is enough of the original to use that pattern or not. Kudos for working this one.
"carpe diem"

Margie Hayes
OPR President
mhayes@operationphotorescue.org

Offline Jo Ann Snover

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 729
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2021, 07:51:50 PM »
This is so tough. First, here's a file that I ran through Affinity Photo's FFT filter to get rid of the bobbly texture, if you want to have a clean (ish) base



I played around with the colors - using multiple methods - and although I wasn't 100% happy with any of the results, I am leaning towards the outfit being purple gingham, not pink. I used a method suggested in the tutorial Bambi recently posted in another thread while exploring - making a selection in the image before creating a Curves Adjustment layer and then Option-Clicking the Auto button so you can avoid damaged areas that will confuse Photoshop's auto options and that helped a bit. I realize that pink seems like an obvious color for a little girl, but the duck and the little giraffe toy in her other hand seem to be right when the gingham is purple, hence my guess thought that it wasn't pink.

So here's my take on the possible colors (on the original) with your work in progress for comparison, plus a suggestion about what might be done for the background - to put in a suggestion of a floral background and a carpet floor using some images lifted from carpet and fabric businesses.



Jo Ann

Offline philbach

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2021, 10:41:20 AM »
Thanks Jo Ann for running this through the FFT filter since there was a dotty geographic pattern on the original.  And for working on the color. I think all would agree on the color of the duck on her dress is yellow.  I will work on the background and the subject some more and will post again later. 
phil

Offline Candice

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2311
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2021, 01:37:31 PM »
I love the smile of this little one!!
Candice

Offline philbach

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #7 on: November 17, 2021, 01:09:56 PM »
I added the background and I think the wallpaper  looks pretty much like the original

phil

Offline Lynnya

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2714
    • Atmospheres Photography
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #8 on: November 18, 2021, 10:16:58 AM »
Hi Phil she's coming along nicely! On my screen the yellow carpet is very bright.. I think both the background and the floor are maybe a bit stark and detract from the dear little one.. I think I'd tone both down a bit and see.. There is still some magenta on her face arm and legs and some damage on both hands and her leg.. good luck Phil this is a tough one indeed.
never giving up......learning from others as I go...

Offline Candice

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2311
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #9 on: November 20, 2021, 01:33:35 AM »
Maybe something like this? I looked for vintage wallpaper.


Candice

Offline philbach

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #10 on: November 20, 2021, 06:00:59 AM »
Thanks.  I am on the road at present but will work on it some more.
phil

Offline philbach

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #11 on: December 02, 2021, 07:51:47 AM »
Well here is my most recent.  I darkened and desaturated the background some and several other changes

phil

Offline Candice

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2311
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #12 on: December 02, 2021, 01:27:37 PM »
Phil, did you put the basket back that the duckie is holding?


« Last Edit: December 02, 2021, 01:45:19 PM by Candice »
Candice

Offline philbach

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #13 on: December 02, 2021, 03:45:26 PM »
Err aah I didn't know the Duckie was holding one. 
phil

Offline philbach

  • OPR Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
Re: Baby in Gingham
« Reply #14 on: December 02, 2021, 04:01:08 PM »
I found it, Candice thanks for pointing that out.
phil