Bride and Bridesmaid

[kstruve]

Yeah, I know.  I was slapping it together kind of quickly and didn't bother to flip that portion of the dress (I've since fixed it).  I flipped it because the reference photo I used had her torso facing the other direction relative to this one.  Good eye, though!

Right now I've been working on the bridesmaid and the background.  I'll post more progress soon!

Thanks guys,
Kurt

[glennab]

Hi Kurt

I'm looking forward to seeing your work as  you clean up this one.  You did such a beautiful job on the last couple you posted. Your art background really shows, and this one appears to have a lot of missing information, as did the last one.  You're an inspiration and a much appreciated source of information, tips & tricks.  I'll be monitoring your progress with great interest.

Cheers!

Glenna

[kstruve]

Well I'm making some progress on this picture, but I'm having a hard time with the bridesmaid's feet - they just don't show up at all in the original or in any of the channels.  So the more I restore it and remove the damage in the background, the more it looks like she's floating in mid-air.  Eventually I'll have to at least suggest the presence of feet.  Anyway, here's what it's looking like now:


What do you guys think?  How would you handle the case of the missing feet?  :huh:

Thanks!
Kurt

[GP]

Hey Kurt  :)

It's great to see you back at work here! I hear rumors you got married and I would like to congratulate you and your lovely wife and wish you all the best for your future.

You did a great job on this restoration already, it's amazing how much you were able to recover!

I'm not sure what to suggest regarding the bridesmaid's feet. Is there maybe a different photo you could borrow from? Paula was working on some other photos from this wedding.

You could maybe keep that area as dark as possible and cover it a bit more with the bride's dress. The bridesmaid's dress could also be a bit longer without being to obvious.

Sorry to be of not of much help with this, but I'm sure you will come up with a solution eventually. ;)

Gerlinde

[Ausimax]

You have it coming along well Kurt, the feet and legs do present a problem when you have no indication of shoe style or the like, and I can think of no feature that you could logically use to screen her legs from view, other perhaps than having the bride sitting on a bench type seat, not a lot of use I know.

Max

[sanbie]

Wow let me say first off I think you are doing a brilliant job on this...Would have been way beyond me!! so I bow in awe of what you have achieved so far  :wnw:

Ok I brightened things way up and do you think the red cirlcle may be her shoes?



Sanbie

[Tess (Tassie D)]

Great job so far. Sanbie that does look like a pair of feet.

[Ausimax]

 
You could well be right Sanbie, I see it as her wearing open toed high-heeled shoes with a broad single strap across the foot, her right foot facing straight ahead, her toes visible just below your circle, and the left foot at an angle to the left.

How's that for good eyesight, or imagination or just plain delusion.  :-\

Max

[phischer]

I don't really see shoes there. I think that's damage being creatively interpreted as shoes. :) One thing I've noticed is that it the bride's dress is too angular. In the original her dress falls more rounded on her right side. Also I think that I can see the leg of the stool or chair that she is sitting on.

[kstruve]

Hey thanks for all the input, folks!  I agree, Phischer that the dress is probably too angular right now.  I don't agree that what you're seeing in the lower left is a stool that she's sitting on.  It's part of her dress.  Here's a hi-res crop of that area:



The folds of her dress can clearly be seen in the (relatively) undamaged area in the shadows.  I probably don't have the hemline correct yet, but I'll keep working on it.  I think right now, the contrast is too high between the dress and the background and that is partially why it seems so stark and angular.  I'll have to adjust the shading on it.

This is also the area where the bridesmaid's feet should be, and that area is covered with damage.  But I think if I can come up with something subtle that suggests feet and blends into the darkness, as Gerlinde suggested, that will be about all I can do for her, feet-wise.

Thanks!
Kurt

[phischer]

Ahh, I see it better now. You are correct. No stool.  I don't see any feet either. I'm sure you can do something to give the suggestion of feet in a shadowy area, though. Nice job so far. This is definitely a tough one.

[glennab]

Hi Kurt

I did some "scanning" of your image this morning, and I agree with you that there's absolutely nada at the lower left.  (Aaron Neville was sitting on the desk with me, so I guess you could call it a "cat scan.")  None of my tricks pulled up a single detail.  I think you're right about having to keep the dark background and maybe (?) have a subtle hint of legs & feet, but nothing distinct.

I also agree that the darker area at the bottom edge of the bride's dress on the left as we see her is actually discolored dress, not a stool leg.

I'll be very interested in how many hours you put into this restoration.  We've been discussing  in different threads how much time a restoration should take, and this is definitely one of the most challenging ones I've seen and is being worked on by one of our top-notch artists (I think!).  There seems to be much concern that the restoration work is taking longer than it should, but I'd think that this sort of work would have to take as long as it takes -- and we shouldn't try to "beat the clock" (or calendar, in my case). Some things just fall into place and others are totally baffling.  I hope this becomes an ongoing discussion and eases the concern of some of the volunteers that they're taking longer than 2 hours to do a restoration.

At any rate, good luck on this one.  Getting detail is going to be rough.

Cheers!

Glenna

[sanbie]

OMG I see a chihauhau...I think my imagination is soaring!! :funny:

Sanbie

[cmpentecost]

As for the time issues, I know that the OPR guidelines are to return the photo in a week, but we ALL know that can't be done on a lot of these photos.  The one week guideline is encouragement to begin work on your photo as soon as you receive it, and not to stick it off to the side to pick up later in a couple of weeks.  And yes, I'd love to have all of these photos returned within a week.  However, we all need to give our eyes a break from the restorations, and with something as difficult as Kurt's photo is, I don't see how it can be done in a week.  Mind you....for those that have had their photos 6+ weeks, I usually follow up with the volunteer to find out what the status is, if I've not been updated on the progress beforehand. 

All in all, I'd MUCH rather have someone take a couple of weeks to work on a photo, with a lot of patience and time, and get it right, than to rush through the restoration and have it at sub par quality.

Kurt, your photo restoration is coming along beautifully, and I know you'll find a way to pull it all together!

Christine

[kstruve]

Thank you guys so much for your input and compliments!

Glenna,  I'm not really sure how many hours I have into this one so far.  If I were beaten with a wet noodle, pinned to the ground and had a gun pointed to my head, I'd guess I'd say about 10 hours.  (Sorry Christine, I know I've had it for two weeks!)  I've worked on it maybe every other day for 1.5 hours at a time - on average.  The problem with these tough ones - as everyone knows - you have to give your eyes a break and then come back to it and give it a fresh look.  You can't do it all in one continuous stretch.

Well I hope to work on it a little more during my lunch hour today and I'll post my progress when I've made a significant step forward.

Thanks,
Kurt