Add your comments, questions or general discussion about the Sep Contest entries as well as the contest itself here. This is also a great place to share your techniques or ask others about theirs.

When I tried to open the Tiff file it opened with Quicktime and wasn't savable.
Is it a lot larger than the jpeg or are the about the same size just a different format?

Loverly

The best way to download the images is by rightclicking (or Cmd/Ctrl clicking) on the link and using "Save Target As".

What did we ever do to you Doug!?! Wow, this has the be the ultimate challenge. I am curious to see what the results will be. I have never done an Oil painting before. Does anyone have any links to some good tutorials so I can get an idea of how to achieve an oil painting? Thanks!

~Amber~

now, if i can just find that script for auto-cleaning/restoring.....

definitely sadistic, doug ;)

Craig

I've been sitting out the challenges - but this one, you can count me in!
This is going to be real interesting. :classic:

Rô

oh boy! I've got a long weekend booked in for this one ;)

Wow,

there's a few hours work! I must be masochistic 'cause I have to try it!

I like this one, and i will surely take part in this competition.

well, if Ro's in then i'm out. no way to compete with him :) (just kidding).

but, i do have one small suggestion here. not all of us use photoshop. thus, books on how to use photoshop arent really much of an incentive as a prize to me. now, i dont really enter these to win the prize; i just enjoy the challenge. but, it might make a bit more sense to have something that could be used by ALL the contestants.

frankly, i'm a little embarrassed even bringing this up. i mean, it's a free prize and we're not paying to enter the contest or anything; it's done purely out of the generosity of the moderators, and probably mostly doug. but, the simple logic of it bugs me a bit. and it's not like i've even been a close contender in any of these, but if i were the only one to enter and thus maybe win (no guarantees even if i were the only one to enter since i cant vote for myself :) ), it might be nice to have a prize i would actually make use of.

maybe a plugin that works for all Photoshop type plugin applications, or a retouchpro t-shirt or something that everyone who won could use?

please, i really DO appreciate that there's even any prize at all, and i'd enter most of them even if there werent. but it would just make a bit more sense to me that the winner would actually make use of any prize given, a new car, a trip to the caribbean, a weekend in vegas.... ;)

and doug, thank you for doing all that you do. we love this place.

Craig

Everyone can feel free to email their favorite vendor and say "Hey, why don't you contact Doug over at RetouchPRO about donating a prize?". If you think this month's contest is tough, try asking a complete stranger to give you their products for free :)

Usually only works when you have one of Mr Colts products in your hand, rest of the time they seem to ignore you. :grin: :grin: :grin:

Craig, Doug and Greg !! :lol:

You guys are a riot exchanging comments, I laugh so much !!
Craig, you have marvelous ideas for prizes, a new car, a trip to the caribbean I mean, those are reasonable requests Doug, why couldn't we get any of those ! :hat:

And Greg, I think that trying to get something out of a complete stranger with Mr.Colt's products in your hands is called "armed robbery" and that is a no no -or so I was told. :bandit: Still a good idea though ;).

And Doug this new photo contest is the ultimate terror for a newbie (meaning me of course) I will still give it a try with not many hopes to win --so you may save the car for another more accessible contest. Though I think we should address our "complaints" to T Paul who accepted the "kind" offer to use that photo.

I downloaded the larger tiff and wonder how will my PC react when starting to work with it if to start it is 12,8 mb and 3285 x 4096 at a resolution of 400 pix/inch !! :heul:

Well one thing is certain it will be great fun !!

Thanks T Paul and Doug :)

Regards - Martha :wavey:

Ya' all better stop chatting and start werking!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is a SERIOUS contest!

Hee hee
Loverly

Just to get a little discussion going.......
Directions:
Restore and turn the file into full-color oil painting.
Literally?

I could well imagine myself trying to go direct from the "damaged" original to the painting without actually restoring (*). Would I get kicked out? I suppose not, but best to clear this up first.

Rô
*Tried it once and failed miserably - but that's experience.

Rô, that thought had occured.

If you want to restore by painting that will be acceptable. The key is that it must be a finished full-color oil painting--so the missing parts and so on must be corrected. I guess you may say that this is a 3-part contest:

1. Restore
2. Colorize
3. Change to an oil painting

You can choose in what order you approach it and how you plan to accomplish the tasks.

Some help please ? :sad:

I tried to use (for the first time) the history brush in the image, but there is a "forbidden" icon and a message appears indicating that the type of color characteristics do not allow to use the history brush.

I converted the image to RGB and it was set as an 8bit RGB image, after receiving the message about the colour I set it as a 16bit RGB but still it would not let me use the brush. Is there a way that I can use that tool, is it useful for this job? I use PhotoShop CS2.

Thank you - Martha :wavey:

I am not familiar with a forbidden icon for colorization. Have you cropped the image after the point when you want to "history" back to? That's the only time I have seen a forbidden icon...

Marthig Hi

Have you changed the dimensions of the image in any way?
Or the resolution of the image.
The history brush will not work if you want to go back to a state before image or resolution changes.

Regards

i have an attempt for my entry. Do we post here?

i have an attempt for my entry. Do we post here?
No

The competition has three separate threads
- This one - which is for discussion;
- The voting thread, which stays locked closed until voting starts;
- The entries thread here (http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11440) where you should post your rendition....if you hurry you'll be first!!

Good luck,

Rô

I tried to use (for the first time) the history brush in the image...
Is that the History Brush, or the ART History Brush?

- If it's the History Brush then my advice will always be the same - Don't use it ever!! Putting things in layers is always better practice.

- If it's the ART History Brush then fine, welcome to the fun side of Photoshop. :classic: :classic:

Rô

Everyone can feel free to email their favorite vendor and say "Hey, why don't you contact Doug over at RetouchPRO about donating a prize?". If you think this month's contest is tough, try asking a complete stranger to give you their products for free

doug,

i contacted Ford, G.M. and Chrysler. they all oddly gave me the same phone number to contact for this sort of thing: 1-800-555-lmao. so, point taken :)

Craig

If you want to restore by painting that will be acceptable. The key is that it must be a finished full-color oil painting--so the missing parts and so on must be corrected. I guess you may say that this is a 3-part contest:

1. Restore
2. Colorize
3. Change to an oil painting

You can choose in what order you approach it and how you plan to accomplish the tasks.
T,

Risking being awfully terribly pedantic (and getting a post from Duv about the benefits os the proximity of sand and sea water). That's not quite what I meant.

Actually it would be more like...
1. Restore (No)
2. Colorize (No)
3. Change to an oil painting (No)
1. Do an oil painting based on the original image ( :classic: )

Rô
(sorry Duv, old habits die hard)

Does anyone else think the man in the photo resembles a bit of Robert Deniro or have I been staring at this thing waaaaaay too long?

~Amber~

T,

Risking being awfully terribly pedantic (and getting a post from Duv about the benefits os the proximity of sand and sea water). That's not quite what I meant.

Actually it would be more like...
1. Restore (No)
2. Colorize (No)
3. Change to an oil painting (No)
1. Do an oil painting based on the original image ( :classic: )

Rô
(sorry Duv, old habits die hard)

I believe Doug intended to test your restoring skills to the max verses creating an oil painting based on the original image. :)

Thanks a lot to PhotoB, Steve and byRo!

PhotoB and Steve you are right ! actually I had just finished cropping it when tried to use the History brush (not Art history Brush byRo), only removed the outer frame of the original image and then thought (to start Somewhere!) to try the history brush that's when the "no-no" icon appeared :)

Anyway byRo, I have just realized that what I wanted was the Healing Brush. Also the first time I try to use it, I find it quite similar to the stamp tool !

I still don't understand the use of the History or History Art brushes -in a few more years perhaps ?- :grin:

Again many thanks to all for responding :classic:

Regards - Martha :wavey:


P.S.: Dreamypix I find the man's face quite familiar but not to Robert de Niro, some famous achiever like Edison, Bell or maybe a US President ? Perhaps we have both been looking at it toooo long ;) !?

Thanks, Martha! At least I know now I am not alone in staring at this thing and seeing famous faces. It was Deniros latest movie, Hide and Seek, that made me think that. He wears glasses in that one. Looks similar to me except the nose, Deniros is alittle longer. Anyways...Better go rest my eyes for a fresh look tommorrow.

~Amber~

Martha and Dreamypix --

I've been staring at this photo and thinking he looks like someone famous as well. To me, he looks like US President Harry Truman.

http://teachpol.tcnj.edu/amer_pol_hist/fi/0000018c.jpg

Excellent Lorraine !

Remarkable resemblance, it is not him though but easily a close relative, father or grandfather maybe ? The coat, bowtie and shirt front "our dear fellow" wears do not fit Truman's times unfortunately :(

Maybe we (you, Dreamypix and me) should start a rehab clinic (sort of) to treat our picture staring condition :D Something tells me there will be many more like us by the end of this contest. :classic:

This is my first attempt at retouching such a disastrous image, and I admire you guys who do this professionally, :bow: how do you manage :surprise: !

Regards - Martha :wavey:

Question? Having now come back some hours later and seeing that I am not as pleased with my entry as I was at the time of calling it completed, it raises the question, is this a one entry per person situation?

Yes there is one entry per person, but you can update your entry as many times as you wish upto the final day of submission. Or at least that has been the established practice with earlier competitions.

loverly,

VERY nice entry! love the gilded frame. would you mind if i copied that frame and used it for a standard Paint Shop Pro frame?

Craig

Question? Having now come back some hours later and seeing that I am not as pleased with my entry as I was at the time of calling it completed, it raises the question, is this a one entry per person situation?

From the rules - 5. Only one entry per person. But previous contests show that 'editing' can cover minor, major and total reworks as long as they are replacements. Our illustrious winner in August pulled a major, and I'd hate to think anyone would feel reluctant about improving their entries. (I like to do post-voting, unsubmitted major reworks, which makes it easier for me to pretend I've won all the contests).

oh doug, thanks ( not so sure now) quaking in my boots and now with loverly's post entirely daunted, is that a yes or no, lol

oh loverly, so superior, unreal, have my vote so far and to think I was so aspired by my inept post, I was following in my uncle's leads ( a true artist), but then I feel so inept by comparison

Yes now I feel bogus

Yes, no, maybe. :wink: I still can't decide whether or how I'll attempt this one.

"daunted"..."Shaking in boots", "oh loverly, so superior :bow: , unreal"!

WOW!!!! This was nice to come back to after church! :blush: Thanks guys! (Wanted to get mine in before I left town for 2 weeks and had no high speed.)

Craig, what is a standard Paint Shop Pro?

Hugs,
Loverly

This is crazy!

I’ve downloaded a 12mb file and converted it to RGB
I have spent hours on step1 (the restoration) and I now have a 207mb PSD file.
And it’s still only about 20% restored. Then I have steps 2 and 3.

What is the best workflow here?

What’s the point working on a 207mb file when all I’m going to do is drop it back to a 100kb Painting?


This challenge could have been made to last 3 months
September Challenge to restore the picture
October Challenge to Colorize the winners Picture
November Challenge to Oil Paint the winner of Octobers Challenge.

Ken

lol..I thought the same thing Ken! I wasn't about to obliverate my nice pic after I worked so hard on it. It was nice though to have a large enough photo to work on to start with for once!

Loverly

Thanks Loverly

Yes, It was nice to have a good sized picture to start with (even if it is the worst one available)
But I felt like dropping the thing back to 100kb before starting on it.

When I do a painting (usually watercolours) a drop in quality does not matter. But with this picture I am not sure whether I will get better results working with a large file size.

If I do brush strokes on a 207mb file I don’t think they will show when dropped to 100kb.

Nice Picture by the way. I like the way you did the tie. I must have spent over an hour trying to sort that out alone. You have extended the collar lower down than the picture shows. I have done the same as it seems the only way to make sense of it.

Ken

Thanks Ken,

Yes, I spent an ton of time on the tie as well as the whole picture but it is a good challenge. I want to add it to my portfolio and what better way to get motivated to do it right than to compete! Soooo...Keep werkin! This restoration stuff is totally different than what I have been concentrating on for the past 2 years. I have tried to stay clear of this stuff since it looked so time consuming and boring. It wasn't boring really but definitly sucked up a lot of time!


Loverly

loverly,

'standard Paint Shop Pro' meant simply a standard paint shop pro frame, like the ones that came with the program.

ken,

what you have to do is tie your network into the SETI share program and let other's computers become as yours ;)

Craig

Sure Ken,
I got it from the Auto FX sofware. There are some really nice frames on there.
Loverly

Sure Ken,
I got it from the Auto FX sofware. There are some really nice frames on there. Ken?

Craig

lol...sorry Craig!

Guess I should get awake before I respond to posts! :lol:

Loverly

:)

auto fx? is this a plugin or program or web site?

Craig

Google it!!!!!

http://www.autofx.com/

lol...sorry Craig!

Guess I should get awake before I respond to posts! :lol:

Loverly


haha, must be a female thing, me too

There's no 'I' in 'Team', but there is a 'Ken' in 'Kraellin'.

Dave.

I'm enjoying all your comments, but I'm still on the fence with this one, as Doug said..........
Yes, no, maybe. I still can't decide whether or how I'll attempt this one.
and I still haven't even figured out how to download that 12 meg Quicktime photo. When I right click, the save option is greyed out. I s'pose downloading it is sorta basic to entering :blush:

and I still haven't even figured out how to download that 12 meg Quicktime photo. When I right click, the save option is greyed out. I s'pose downloading it is sorta basic to entering :blush:(..probably starting another discussion here.. ;) )
I downloaded both and I don't see using just the jpg version as any disadvantage.
If this was a pure "restoration" competition, or if the final image had to be very large maybe it could have some effect.
However, to produce a 800 x 600 image in which the result should be an oil-painted look and not photographic, I'd say that the 12M image is pure overkill!

Rô

There's no 'I' in 'Team', but there is a 'Ken' in 'Kraellin'.

Dave.Can't find "Dave" in "Doug Colwell" though!

Rô

thanks kiska :)

Craig

Have to admit I'm working on the small file, (12 meg on dialup is pretty big), and like Ro I can't see much advantage to starting with a high res mess.

If you want to work on the JPEG version vs the huge TIFF version, that is completely understandable. I just wanted to make sure that people didn't work on the thumbnail version.

I just want to remind everyone of the "full-color" requirement for your entries.... :happy:

~T

Originally Posted by T Paul

This month’s contest is quite the challenge (Doug picked this one out).

Yes it is. and I think you should give us a Hand.

CrypticKen

Raniday,

Quicktime associates graphic TIFF files to itself...and somewhat tenaciously! I had the same problems you're running into when trying to view TIFF files on the US Patent Office site. To get around this, I installed a shareware program called "Internetiff", which can be found here:

http://www.internetiff.com/docs/try.htm

It wrestles the TIFF association away from Quicktime, and now I am able to right-click Save As with no problem.

More information on this issue can be found here:

http://www.dot.co.pima.az.us/gis/webdev/tiffquicktime.htm

Hope this helps.

I opted to download the TIFF version for this month's challenge, mainly because I like to avoid the artifacts introduced by JPEG's lossy compression. Although the TIFF file IS huge, I resampled it in Photoshop to an 8x10" 300dpi image to get something more reasonable to work with. Works well...

- Kurt

If you want to restore by painting that will be acceptable. The key is that it must be a finished full-color oil painting--so the missing parts and so on must be corrected. I guess you may say that this is a 3-part contest:

1. Restore
2. Colorize
3. Change to an oil painting

You can choose in what order you approach it and how you plan to accomplish the tasks.

I'm sure it's a bit late in the game for this, but it might've been interesting to have everyone post all 3 of their final images - one for each stage :devil: If this didn't make the contest more challenging, the voting certainly would be! :classic:

but it might've been interesting to have everyone post all 3 of their final images - one for each stage that assumes that everyone works the same way. what if someone is going directly from the original straight to the oil?

Craig

I have started playing with this, and if I have time to finish it it could become an entry ... ;)

The only thing I am tussling with is - for the oil painting part ... I have Painter, but I feel guilty using it as some here have only an image editing program (I use Photoshop), I feel like it would be an unfair advantage to use Painter. So, my challenge is to do everything in Photoshop - except I don't really know the best ways to acheive an oil look in Photoshop, I have done blended watercolor types of things, but the texture and depth of oil I have not accomplished outside of painter ... I did a quick search here and didn't find anything. Does anyone here know of any good threads or tutorials that dabble in brushes / oils in Photoshop?

Thanks,
Roger

that assumes that everyone works the same way. what if someone is going directly from the original straight to the oil?

Craig

That's why the suggestion ( half in jest :classic: ). Requiring posting of the final image for each stage would've made T and Doug's intent more clear. Would some still go straight to the oil? Possibly. But if you had to post all 3 anyways, it seems more likely one would do the painting based on a colorization that came after a restoration - which I gather from what T has said was the original idea.

- Kurt

Just my 2 cents, I can't see how without at least some restoration (extensive at least) one could go straight to oil as the detail just simply would not be there. My hardest issue was finding something that reminded me of an oil painting and all I could find was the smudge tool. Yes limited I am. The smudge tool reminded me greatly of my uncle's oil paintings but more recently I am struggling to recall a portrait of my aunt that he once did and I don't recall the daubs being as predominant, but that is beside the point. Art unfortunately is not my strong point so I cannot imagine how someone, unless very skilled could pull it off and if they could, then probably the skills should be rewarded. I realise the workflow idea was put in motion, however I think you have to rely upon integrity of the person, and restoration can be defined to include, cloning, painting or really any form of restoration that could be thought of including, as in loverly's borrowed body parts. Trully I cannot see real advantage/disadvantage here unless by definition a fixed definition or method for voiding can be set which I think is unattainable.

Trully this challenge is a discipline thing and an endurance thing I think, spending too much consolidated time on this image is decaying, I think you need the discipline to take frequent breaks and then return to the image. Trying to attempt this image in one go, you easily lose the plot.

going straight to oil painting is possible, depending on your method. If you use straight filters then you would need quite a bit of restoration in key areas. If you prefer to actually 'paint' the image then you wouldnt need to restore it first.
Also if you were going for a more abstract painting style then restoration wouldnt be essential. Remember 'oil painting' is a very wide scope, it doesnt specify a style of painting, only the medium.

I have started playing with this, and if I have time to finish it it could become an entry ... ;) ...
... ... I did a quick search here and didn't find anything. Does anyone here know of any good threads or tutorials that dabble in brushes / oils in Photoshop?
Thanks,
Roger

Hi Roger,

I admire your wish to play "fair" with us strictly Photoshop users and not resort to Painter. If you have not yet found another source here (http://www.myjanee.com/tuts/painted3/painted3.htm) there is an explanation about turning a picture into an oilpainting image. Also you may find more tips here (http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/photoshop/).
Hope it helps and welcome to the future clinic to treat the aftereffects of participating in this challenge. :lol: A possible name may be "we remember Doug and T Paul" or something like that ;)

Regards - Martha :wavey:

thank you, nancyj! that's EXACTLY what i'm talking about. remember folks, 'oil painting' could mean everything from classical rembrandt/da vinci to impressionist, pointilist, impasto, cubist, and so on. i didnt see anywhere, anything in the rules that said 'classical only'. or which specified ANY style of oil. i could VERY easily see, for instance, completely bypassing the 'restoration' by doing a smudge oil.

T_Paul's original instructions: Directions:
Restore and turn the file into full-color oil painting. the 'final' work would not necessarily show that one had done an intermediate restoration process. therefore, it's a moot step in my opinion. do it if that helps, but it's completely arbitrary that you do so for this contest. the ONLY thing that is going to be judged is the final result. assumptions that one has to restore before one can 'oil' are completely your own.

perhaps it would help to think of what an oil painting restorer goes through when he/she restores an old master or any other type painting.

and kschuz, ok, i got what you were saying. thanks :)

Craig

I satill havent decided what style of painting to go for.
I love michelangelo's style - immaculate detail and barely a brushstroke visible - but that wouldnt do very well for a simulated oil painting challenge since the whole point is that its super realistic and not like a painting.

On the other hand, my wacky side loves fauvism but I'm not sure if that would work for this fella.

Theres too much damage and the picture is too old to do a good impressionist rendering of it, too much is lost to get any feeling from the subject at all IMO.

...its all very difficult

I've been reading the posts and I'm getting the idea that some things are getting distorted here. Permit me a few lines......

Going straight to paint

I've done a lot of restoration, so have you all (I suppose). Many times before starting you can "see" (in your head) the original image under the damage but trying to get there by cloning / stamping / overlays / filters etc. etc.. takes a long time and often doesn't get you to exactly the image that you had seen.
So you say to yourself "why can't I just paint over this torn / dirty / moldy mess with what I saw?". But you won't do that (except for a touch of airbrush, maybe) because you're dong a restoration and not art.
Now what if someone (like Doug and T :bigthmb: ) comes along and says "Do me a painting". Suddenly you're not restricted to the usual restorer's toolbox and the "leapfrog" option is now open - just paint what you "see" under the muck.
I ain't saying it's easy (or easier), I'm just saying that it's possible.

Photoshop (or Paint Shop Pro) vs. Painter

I think some people are missing the real issue here. There are two methods used for painting:

1) Start from a nice image and apply some (or various, or lots of) filters, plugins, blends etc. but without ever actually getting your mouse wet (as it were) with paint. Our friend Danny Raphael is a master at this, and a look at his posts will show that he comes up with REAL paintings by judicious application and masking of the impressionist plugin.
2) Apply mouse/pen brush paint strokes using the original image as a base. Could be "Smudge Painting", "Art History Brush", "Stamp Impressionist"/"Cloning" or actually "dipping" a brush in paint and painting.
Of these, only "Cloning" is restricted to Painter BUT the (neglected :depressed ) Photoshop Stamp Impressionist works the same way.
Many, many people have done wonderful paintings in Photoshop, and Painter is just another option and NOT A SUBSTITUTE.

Painter IS a good program, but it is NOT the answer to all your dreams, it certainly does not paint by itself, and for an image 800 x 600 all that fancy brushwork is just going to get lost in jpg compression.

so Photoshop / Paint Shop Pro / Painter or whatever just remember, have fun!! OK?

Rô
Photoshop: I also particpate in other more "arty" forums, and the best entries there are not always from Painter

Go Rô!!!!!!!

I tend to favor the classical style and perhaps pointilism if done properly. However, even if the style of oil was in the air, the focus ( as i understand it) is on three steps: Restore (some semblance of the original individual); color (ascribe colors to various portions of the restored piece), and finally make it an oil.

I tend towards the darker pictures for the oils- dependent on their age/ wear and grime accumulation, but was disappointed in this one, as when the entire picture/ frame was completed and uploaded (or restored and colored as best one is able), the brush strokes were muted or almost imperceptible.

Looking forward to seeing others.

Sean

Photoshop. did Faustina generate a tutorial for her July win? :blush:

Thank you all!!!

This is a very good discussion, which I've been following in detail.

I can't wait to see more results from those who really know what they're doing with this mess. :)

Lorraine

My worst problem was trying to figure out his age and then contouring his face to bring out age lines, etc.

Lorraine


Lorraine,
I also had the same trouble. It was difficult to keep him looking old and not give him glamour skin! You did a fine job on your little man!

Loverly

Loverly, thank you for your kind comments.

Your version has depth and "sparkle" that I couldn't capture. You did a fantastic job, and without a Wacom -- oh my!!!!

Lorraine :)

Thank you very much Lorraine,
This is more of a contest against myself and my abilities...... so I did spend probably way to much time on that photo and should have spent more!

Happy Weekend!
Loverly

Just to explain my last posting here.

This is what I saw in the original picture as soon as I saw it

From the pictures posted so far nobody else sees the same.

The table may be part of the frame but I am still not sure.

Please have a close look before you start laughing

I know none of this makes sense with the picture but the first time I looked at this I saw hands on a table.


Ken

Well, I have finished mine and I have to I think that this was the hardest and most challenging contest yet. I loved every tedious moment. The part that took me the longest was restoring the photo. I am glad that I had lots of practice from doing the challeges on this site.

Cathy

Hi Ken,

interesting thought. Not relevant to tightly cropped efforts, but an interesting find. You have me wondering though. Now I have to go back and do some razzle dazzle with the channels (play) again... :glasses:

Thanks.

Question for T-Paul:

In restoration of a picture, are we looking only at the picture within the frame or the entire picture (inclusive of the frame) provided us or.... is restoration an artful interpretation of the figure :bawling: :blush: :lol: :spchless:

I felt I had to let you know how I admire the work you all have posted so far, I have been working on my attempt every day and never like what I get, and am on the restoring part of it!. Makes me realize how little I know about this art --no doubt it is an art. I will finish it though with heavens know what results :spchless: :( :confused: .

Well will attack Mr. messed up once more :lol:

Regards :wavey:

marthig posted
Hi Roger

I admire your wish to play "fair" with us strictly Photoshop users and not resort to Painter. If you have not yet found another source here there is an explanation about turning a picture into an oilpainting image. Also you may find more tips here.
Hope it helps and welcome to the future clinic to treat the aftereffects of participating in this challenge. A possible name may be "we remember Doug and T Paul" or something like that

Thanks, Martha

I just posted mine and did it all in photoshop.

I noticed that I was the only one that removed the collar - I wasn't sure how it went together, and since this was an interpretive oil rather than a restoration I figured I would have him look the way I wanted him to - I know - the arrogance ...

To byRO,

I read through your post regarding Photoshop or Painter and you have it spot on - I just wanted to see for myself if I could do it all in Photoshop and what it would look like without the Painter assist.

-Roger

I think that's called "flare" Roger ... i kinda like it :classic:

Sean

Hi all, this collar thing has had me bugged too. I seem to remember coming across a similar pic a long time ago, and I seem to also remember something about this garb being associated with a profession (lawyer or banker?). My googles have been unsuccessful, so I was hoping one of the senior members (150 years old or so) might have more info.

Hi all, this collar thing has had me bugged too. I seem to remember coming across a similar pic a long time ago, and I seem to also remember something about this garb being associated with a profession (lawyer or banker?). My googles have been unsuccessful, so I was hoping one of the senior members (150 years old or so) might have more info.

Hi Doug !

I also first thought that the white band on his left side was one of the many smudges in the photo but then I went back to where we downloaded it and is full of images (daguerreotypes mostly) of guys of that period, about 1840 through 1870.

That type of collar must have been a most uncomfortable thing to wear. I don't know about their being some sort of professional thing, looking at the other images though, it seems to me it was mostly a (sadistic) fashion trend.

Did you people know that of the hundreds of images in that site, Doug (our dear Janitor) picked the most damaged one ?! :eek: :devil: :rolleyes: Must not complain as I am learning quite a few things, among them to admire you professional retouchers :bow:

Regards - Martha :wavey:

P.S.: BTW I am a few years younger than 150 !

I had trouble with the collar too. I figured it was a rigid Gladstone collar, but I just couldn't quite figure out where it was on the other side of his face, so I just left that side collarless. I like Doug's little hint of a collar on the left side, but I wasn't quite sure where to put it, as I figured it would be standing up straight, and not lying flat.
I did the whole thing in Paint Shop Pro 7, which is all I have here at work. I couldn't quite get a nice paint effect going (certainly nothing like I could have done in Photoshop) Does anyone have any helpful hints for a nice effect using Paint Shop only? I used the brush strokes effect on a duplicated layer, then blurred the layer and set it to about 50% opacity, as the brush storkes effect seems way too harsh and pixelised for my taste.

Fembot

Hi Ken,
Question for T-Paul:

In restoration of a picture, are we looking only at the picture within the frame or the entire picture (inclusive of the frame) provided us or.... is restoration an artful interpretation of the figure :bawling: :blush: :lol: :spchless:

You can choose to work with the picture with or without the frame.

Restoration-wise, restore the photo to the best of your ability, some interpretation will be required, but try to stay fairly true to the photo vs an abstract interpretation (no Picasso's please).

Thanks T Paul,

I'm still struggling through the glossary of terms and trying to understand how to adhere to the guidelines.

For those of you who may have taken offense at my question, please do consider it as being surrounded by all the usual (sometines stated, sometimes not) caveats of being a newbie; not having done this long enough; my own confusion and interpretation over instructions and what finally is posted and the stumbling efforts we all take to get there, and oh yes! that resident pit bull: frustration - with the end -product. :classic:

Thanks again T-Paul

Sean

As to the collar...this one (http://www.wheaton.edu/learnres/ARCSC/exhibits/jblanchard1/images/blanchardoil-sm.jpg) is pretty much spot on.

Rô

HI all. Thought I would share my quick and dirty version of the oil. I did NO cloning. Always looking for a faster way, I tried turning the portrait into a sketch, then painted in the colors in both Painter and PHotoshop. Lazy, I know! Anyhow just wonderful versions so far.
MargaretM

welcome to RetouchPRO, poorman.

nice first entry!

Craig

I must say I have been very impressed with the entries so far. This contest is quite the challenge and our members are meeting it head on!! KUDOS!

~T

Finally stopped thinking of how to do it and got down and did it!!

I took the direct path, and like I said earlier, it's not so much easier. Though I do believe it's a lot more fun.

My sequence was:
in Painter...
1) Traced an outline sketch over the original;
2) Blocked in the component parts with solid colour, each on a separate layer;
3) Applied blocky lighter and darker strokes following the outlines and observing the original;
4) Blended the blocky strokes;
in Photoshop....
5) Made a new background;
6) Tweaked Levels and Hues of each component layer separately;
7) Drew the spectacles
8) Condensed to just three layers: background, portrait, spectacles;
in Painter.....
9) Cloned (oils) and blended (soft stump);
10) Equalize;
11) Surface texture - 3D brushstrokes;
in Photoshop......
12) USM / Embossed - masked for different sections

Phew! Looks like a lot of work ...
AND IT WAS! (+-6 hours)

(fun, though)

Rô

This contest is getting close to the end....don't forget to turn in your entries!

Contest will run from 1 Sep to 23 Sep 2005. Deadline for entries is 6pm EDT 23 Sep 2005.

Was so concentrated on finishing it that forgot that the deadline was 6pm EDT :bawling: and now I won't be able to vote either truly sad. :(
So many good works, and having worked almost all month on this "messy guy" as I named the various versions I made ;) I can really appreciate the marvelous results obtained by all.

Well congratulations to all ! :bow:

T Paul, I wonder if it will be alright to post here the results of my efforts ?

Regards - Martha :classic:

Ah - I also got my deadlines mixed up! For some reason I've got used to the deadline falling on a Sunday, oh well, I'd actually only done the restoration bit so probably wouldn't have completed it anyway. A few really outstanding entries though - a pity I can't vote.

I am sorry Caitlin you could not post your entry. I've learned a few things with this challenge (I think !) and one of them is how much I still have to learn about image restoring !

Oh, well will post it in my gallery, I would hate to discard almost a month of very hard and frustrating work :grin:

I have a favourite but I guess we are not allowed to mention anything since we are not participants :)

Best regards - Martha

This is my first work in retouchpro. Please send your comments. :tamil77@gmail.com

I wish I'd bothered to enter my appalling attempt just so that I could comment in the voting section because so far I'm stunned by the way the votes are swinging.
In my mind there is 1 persons entry that is leaps and bounds above the rest and barely 4 others that I could consider voting for. In fact I counted less than 10 that I would consider even met the full criteria for this contest and it was the same with the last one.
While there are some very nice artistic renderings the contest did stipulate that they should be 'oil paintings'. There are some entries that are clearly watercolours and pastels and chalks. (as well as gouche and acrylic but I'll let those slide :p)

I find the judging of these contests to be fundamentally flawed, since they are judged by the contestants so there is no need to adhere to the rules since no-one else does and when it comes to voting you wont gain any marks for it (in many cases, quite the opposite). Entries are judged based on the misconceptions of other entrants... for example(and I dont mean to be picking on any one person in particular) but there have been comments about not completing the mans glasses, I examined the full rez picture carefully and could find no evidence that the man is wearing glasses, rather, I believe they are spectacles as there is nothing to suggest that anything attached to the eyepieces is also attached to the ear (see attached). I'm not meaning to pick on anyone, just demonstrating a point.

I guess my point is what is the point of having rules for these contests? Why not just say everyone do whatever you like and we'll pick a winner based on who we all like best, cos thats what actually happens, except when there are newcommers who try to follow the rules and lose out because they restricted their entry based on those rules. Rules in competitions should ensure fairness and a level playing field for all entrants.

Sorry if this is out of line but I felt I had to say something, I'm sure a moderator will remove it if they consider it to be against the rules.

Not to be a rigorist, but is it appropriate to post a new version of one's entry in the discussion thread *after* the voting has started?

And Nancy, you make some very excellent points.

- Kurt

Kurt,
I deleted my post becuase I do not want to be accussed of cheating!

Loverly

I think removing the post is a good idea. I wasn't suggesting there was any cheating...it just seemed inappropriate given that the main thread is locked after voting begins. Posting new versions here could be viewed as coming in the back door, and that would not be a good thing. :classic:

Kurt,
It wasn't a new post it was the same pic only larger, but if that is considered cheating/inappropriate then I sure don't want that!

Good Luck to all!
Loverly

Hello Nancy,

I agree with your comments. I included glasses. I have reasons for that. Your comments on voting, unfortunately, are too true. It has become a lovefest with the pursuit of votes. Support is nice, necessary and welcome, but some of the stuff just goes over the top... way over the top :lol: However, I still love the opportunity to play with these pictures and enhance my skills. I have a long way to go to achieve the level of a few in this group and that is what i aspire to... hard work and lost and losts of mistakes ( I have that part down pat :blush: ) and hopefully helpful critiques and examples of how to improve.

Looking at the pictures, only Doug's seems to have the requisite research, and analysis, but i am working on it. I didn't think the nez perce /glasses were apropo, but that is why I am still lerning. However, this is all personal opinion and perspective and that doesn't equate with honey... more like vinegar..LOL.

I still get my chuckles though. Thanks for your thoughts.

Sean

I didn't think the nez perce /glasses were apropo

Sean2, I think you meant 'pince-nez' for glasses. Nez Perce is an Indian tribe.

seems a few are a bit touchy tonight (my time), chill out relax, don't take it so peronally

actually, the glasses are not pince-nez. pinze-nez has no frame going to the ears on either side. they are supported solely by the nose.

i also made the mistake of adding in a wire frame to the left ear. there is NO evidence in the original that such existed.

and, i was also somewhat surprised at the voting this time. to me, the voting criteria as stated in the rules was... restore and make it in the style of an oil portraiture. this is a fairly distinct style. the rules stated: "Restore and turn the file into full-color oil painting." now, there is some leeway in that, but to me it meant make it like those old oil portraits you see hanging above a mantel or in a library of a wealthy home. they are generally a fairly heavy oil, often done on a dark background and often with a fairly gaudy, gilded, large gold frame. the portraits were expensive. they were commissioned only by the wealthy. and, they were commissioned only to well known artists who could capture the essence of person's face. they were not, therefore, impressionistic or some other style that would not capture what a person really looked like. they were close approximations of the person, done in a fairly classic style. i mean, why else would we first restore and then paint.

now, i'll admit something else here. i thought i would at least place this time and was quite disappointed that i've gotten no votes this time. i mean, i thought i'd done an excellent restore. but, in going over all the other entries and comparing them to the original in Paint Shop Pro and then looking at mine the same way, it was obvious i'd missed a number of important things. so, no sour grapes here.

i will also critique anyone's piece if they wish to post it in the critique forum.

i also had an idea while sorting through all this contest voting and so on. recently, i think it was Ro who said in another forum, that retouchpro is something akin to a college. we are all learning here. and in that spirit, i think it would make an interesting contest to have 'preliminaries' or stages of voting. folks would enter their initial works. everyone's initial piece would be critiqued. there would be no voting yet, just critiqueing. there would then be a second stage where you would be allowed to correct and re-enter. then the voting would occur. this would keep with the 'we're here to learn' spirit of retouchpro. in looking at my own work on this contest, i've already gone back and corrected a few things just for my own satisfaction. i think this would be especially helpful to those that received no votes. heck, you could even do several stages of critiqueing if you wanted, spanning several months. or make it an additional contest separate from the normal monthly contest.... a 'learning' contest.

at any rate, my thanks to all who entered. i enjoyed looking at all the entries.

Craig

Was so concentrated on finishing it that forgot that the deadline was 6pm EDT :bawling: and now I won't be able to vote either truly sad. :(
So many good works, and having worked almost all month on this "messy guy" as I named the various versions I made ;) I can really appreciate the marvelous results obtained by all.

Well congratulations to all ! :bow:

T Paul, I wonder if it will be alright to post here the results of my efforts ?

Regards - Martha :classic:

Sorry to hear you missed the deadline, but feel free to post your results to this thread for others to critique!

I am sorry Caitlin you could not post your entry. I've learned a few things with this challenge (I think !) and one of them is how much I still have to learn about image restoring !

Oh, well will post it in my gallery, I would hate to discard almost a month of very hard and frustrating work :grin:

I have a favourite but I guess we are not allowed to mention anything since we are not participants :)

Best regards - Martha

The Discussion thread is open to "discussion" so those that did not enter (as well as those who did) feel free to discuss what you liked or didn't like about the various entries. You can even put how you would have voted here. The votes won't count, but it allows the participants to see what people thought of their entries.

i also had an idea while sorting through all this contest voting and so on. recently, i think it was Ro who said in another forum, that retouchpro is something akin to a college. we are all learning here. and in that spirit, i think it would make an interesting contest to have 'preliminaries' or stages of voting. folks would enter their initial works. everyone's initial piece would be critiqued. there would be no voting yet, just critiqueing. there would then be a second stage where you would be allowed to correct and re-enter. then the voting would occur. this would keep with the 'we're here to learn' spirit of retouchpro. in looking at my own work on this contest, i've already gone back and corrected a few things just for my own satisfaction. i think this would be especially helpful to those that received no votes. heck, you could even do several stages of critiqueing if you wanted, spanning several months. or make it an additional contest separate from the normal monthly contest.... a 'learning' contest.

at any rate, my thanks to all who entered. i enjoyed looking at all the entries.

Craig

Craig,

I like the idea of a two stage contest. Perhaps the first month is your initial entry and a week for those to critique and offer suggestions and then you have the second month to makes changes and then vote on the winner.

Are there others interested in this idea?

It all seems to be getting a little frayed at the edges this time around.

It was a very ambitious contest; a restoration (a difficult one at that) and then to undo all that hard work and turn it into an oil painting.
I personally think that everyone’s interpretation of “oil painting” is wide and diverse.
We all see things in different ways!

As for the amazement at what is being voted for, as I said, we all see differently and have different tastes. If we want a contest to be judged by a panel of experts, then the fun and friendliness goes out of the window, apart from escalating costs.

I believe it’s possible that some of us could be persuaded by familiar names, and possibly a little embarrassed to vote for someone new, well maybe not embarrassed, but we like to go with the flow.
I don’t have any preference to a voting system (public or private), but what about some way of having anonymous entries, A, B, C, D etc, then public votes. But it would probably throw up horrendous problems – name revealed when cursor is hovered over etc. (just a thought)

We have got to remember that this is for fun and for learning, and I for one have learnt more from this site than anywhere else. I don’t want to get to a situation where the moderators feel it’s not worth the hassle.

Let’s appreciate what we have got here.

Got to go now and upset someone with my votes.

All the best everyone

actually, the glasses are not pince-nez. pinze-nez has no frame going to the ears on either side. they are supported solely by the nose.

i also made the mistake of adding in a wire frame to the left ear. there is NO evidence in the original that such existed.

I think you mean ARE pince-nez there Craig? Absolutely agree, I was surprised where I saw so many glasses appear.

and, i was also somewhat surprised at the voting this time. to me, the voting criteria as stated in the rules was... restore and make it in the style of an oil portraiture. this is a fairly distinct style. the rules stated: "Restore and turn the file into full-color oil painting." now, there is some leeway in that, but to me it meant make it like those old oil portraits you see hanging above a mantel or in a library of a wealthy home. they are generally a fairly heavy oil, often done on a dark background and often with a fairly gaudy, gilded, large gold frame. the portraits were expensive. they were commissioned only by the wealthy. and, they were commissioned only to well known artists who could capture the essence of person's face. they were not, therefore, impressionistic or some other style that would not capture what a person really looked like. they were close approximations of the person, done in a fairly classic style. i mean, why else would we first restore and then paint.

CraigRegarding the 'controversy' about oil paintings etc, I do feel it could be helpful to have more explicit guidelines for some of these contests. This has come up in other challenges what a term meant, and long and sometimes heated debate has ensued. I know T Paul wants to keep the contests open to creativity, but in cases like this I think that voting and entry would be fairer if it was spelt out clearly what criteria should be voted on, and for instance what 'oil painting means.

Craig,

I like the idea of a two stage contest. Perhaps the first month is your initial entry and a week for those to critique and offer suggestions and then you have the second month to makes changes and then vote on the winner.

Are there others interested in this idea?Yes it sound like an interesting idea T Paul, though I think you would need to think through the process carefully to ensure thre were no downsides (like entries that were not getting high praise choosing not to enter therefore your entry pool dwindling further) If you were to do it I would suggest it as an occasional, not every contest - for those that require skill - like restorations and traditional colourisation I think it would be fair, those that are largely creative (like the last car contest) I think it would not be as appropriate.

Entries are judged based on the misconceptions of other entrants... for example(and I dont mean to be picking on any one person in particular) but there have been comments about not completing the mans glasses, I examined the full rez picture carefully and could find no evidence that the man is wearing glasses, rather, I believe they are spectacles as there is nothing to suggest that anything attached to the eyepieces is also attached to the ear (see attached). I'm not meaning to pick on anyone, just demonstrating a point.

Nancy,
The reason for my comments on the incomplete glasses were not based on the right side of the mans face that is mostly gone but rather on the left side were I see clearly a hindge for the ear piece.
Squinting helps one to see more details sometimes on these tough photos.
Loverly

The Discussion thread is open to "discussion" so those that did not enter (as well as those who did) feel free to discuss what you liked or didn't like about the various entries. You can even put how you would have voted here. The votes won't count, but it allows the participants to see what people thought of their entries.Ok, well if you are sure T Paul...

Here's my votes (non-counting)

I was really blown away by how good a couple of the entries were - quite superb I thought, and showing a lot of skill. These were:

1. Loverly. It looked lovely - just like a traditional oil, was an excellent likeness, and though it's true the frame made the actual picture a bit small to judge, it also gave just the right feel. A pity he is wearing full glasses though.

2. Doug Colwell. Also a terrific likeness, and expertly done. I just didn't like the painting style as much, and as someone has pointed out the paper texture is wrong for an oil.


After this it got harder - I thought there were about 8 runner-ups, but here is an attempt to rank them:

3. Bob Down. (An Australian I presume? lol) Nice overall effect, Just a pity again with the glasses, and also a missing lower lip, so some problems with the restore phase.

4. kshultz. Fair likeness, but looking a bit cutout, and again the paper texture and lack of brushstrokes let it down as an oil painting.

5.Freddieanne/Shalford. I give up, can't pick between these two.....

Honourable mentions:

Cazubi - Really nice looking painting and excellent paintwork (probably the best), but not a good likeness.

Kiska - I actually really liked this interesting attempt, but it was not a good likeness.

Nancy,
The reason for my comments on the incomplete glasses were not based on the right side of the mans face that is mostly gone but rather on the left side were I see clearly a hindge for the ear piece.
Squinting helps one to see more details sometimes on these tough photos.
LoverlyThis is clearly one of those artistic judgements in restoration - personally while I see what you are referring to, it could easily be dirt on the photo, as well as the fact that pinze-neze can have a hinge there to open the frames to insert lenses (see here). (http://www.english.interoptika.ru/optics/history/pince-nez/?zoom=left) I consider that the other side is not so damaged that you would not see a shadow at least of the glasses arm if it was there.

Caitlin,
Thank for the ghost vote!
My voting was not based on if they had the completed glasses or not. It was only my opinion as I stated at the begining of the post so it doesn't really matter to me about the glasses really. I based my voting on if he looked like the original photo of the old guy or didn't.

Loverly

caitlin,

no, i did mean 'not'. i do not believe these are true pinze-nez. there is a line right in the right place on the glasses on his right side that is partially covered with a white smudge. the line is just the right thickness for a wire, just in the right place, going back towards the ear at just the right angle and ending just at the side of his head where it disappears. and, there is no visual evidence on the other side of a corresponding wire. therefore, these are not traditional glasses, nor are they pinze-nez. someone mentioned 'spectacles'. maybe that's right; i dont know. but they dont appear to be pinze-nez.

but, as we all know in restoration/reconstruction, every line, every smudge, every dot is subject to question. so, pinze-nez, not pinze-nez...it's sort of moot. the real question was about the other side of the head and the implanted wire there.

now, i'd also like to qualify my post about oil portraits. whereas i have a certain idea of what that is and what that means to me, i by certainly no means mean to say that's what everyone's idea necessarily is. but, being it was my vote, i could only go on my criteria and understanding of t_paul's criteria. but, like i did say in my first post about the voting, there's always leeway.

the only additional qualifier made on this subject was by t_paul in a later post on the rules. i think it had something to do with a more radical style of painting, which re-inforced to me the idea of more traditional styles.

there's always going to be debates on the contests. that's just part and parcel with a contest. and whereas i was looking for more traditional styles of oil portraiture, i did not disqualify anyone's work based on a less traditional. but, i did disqualify one that used a less traditional style where it didnt meet the restoration part of the contest. there just wasnt enough detail for a 'portrait'.

and that brings me to another point. has anyone ever commissioned or heard of a commissioned portrait of a real individual where the person wanted it done in impressionistic or modern or cubist? 'portrait' itself tends to lend to the definition of the work. yeah, i know, there are always exceptions, especially if you also include self-portrait. but the time period of the picture, the stated criteria, the stately appearance of the gentleman, the fact that it was a portrait, the fact that you had to restore first...these just all led me to believe 'oil portrait in the classic, traditional style'.

but, i would also grant that the rules were broad enough to certainly allow for more than that. i dont have a problem with it and i had no problem with it when i voted. in fact, i'm rather glad some didnt follow the traditional. vive la' difference!

Craig

My two bits. The thing on the left side of the 'specs' is consistant with the little stem that was commonly found on one side of the pince-nez's I googled (I'm assuming it was something to grab onto when removing them, and something to tie a string or cord to). Wire frames would head up to the ears (above eye level) and the thing in our picture looks to me to be heading down towards the middle of his ear.

As for thick oil paint or canvas showing through, I'm claiming my artist was too poor to waste paint.

My two cents...I agree with you Doug. My first impulse was to recreate ear stems for the glasses, but when I looked more closely at the left side, the 'dark area' seemed lower on the frames than it should be for a stem hinge. Then comparing to the right side, I came to the conclusion that there are no ear stems at all. I do not believe the right side is so obliterated as to completely remove all evidence of a stem, if one in fact existed at all. I concluded these must be hard-bridge pince-nez style spectacles and found very similar (though not exact) examples on the net. Also, this style was very popular during the time period of this photo.

As for the dark area on the left - many of the examples I viewed, though not all, had a small nub or loop on the frame for attaching what was referred to as a "safety strap". This dark area could be evidence of something like that, or it could just be a smudge. Arbitrarily, I went with the latter.

Even with the artistic style and voting ambiguities some have expressed, this has been an educational project, just for the research and analysis it inspired. Fun stuff :nod:

- Kurt

Craig,
I like the idea of a two stage contest. Perhaps the first month is your initial entry and a week for those to critique and offer suggestions and then you have the second month to makes changes and then vote on the winner.
Are there others interested in this idea?
I agree with the possibility and also with Caitlin's suggestion about not for all contests but reserved for those similar to this one, where it is necessary to have a great deal of skill and experience at restoring very damaged images as this one.
It was a great and most interesting challenge, thanks T-Paul !

well, i set out to prove myself right or wrong about the glasses/pinze-nez question. doug and kurt both made some very good points, so i wanted to see if i could find something more definitive to argue this one way or another. mind you, i dont really care if my original speculation is right or wrong; i just wanted to know.

lol. i found out nothing. i could see the arguement either way. i did find an interesting web site and some very good pics on 'spectacles', however. this is the addy for the type of spectacle i originally thought our gentleman was wearing. i'm no longer so convinced. http://www.eyeglasseswarehouse.com/ridingtemples.html

oh, and the original contest pic lists it as a library of congress pic, but i couldnt find it there :(

Craig

Finally got to the bottom of the pince-nez controversy.

by george, i think he's got it!

great post, doug :)

Craig

Thanks Craig. I was unable to find examples of 19th century specs exactly the same as these, but they were probably pretty rare.

The Specs Debate!

I found these, just to put the cat among the pidgeons.

Scroll down to "Golden Spectacles" image

Specs (http://www.english.interoptika.ru/optics/history/european/)


What do you reckon?

Doug, sooo funny :lol:

Shalford,
Great find, I guess your post settles the issue ? :nod:

Regards - Martha :wavey:

Steve, good match - same shape and style, a little thinner maybe?

Yo,

Stand corrected on the glasses (prince XXX as you say:-)). Learnin as always. Everything else stands :lmao:

To the few who have generously provided their steps. Thank you.

Sean

Well done Doug!!

Brilliant entry.

All the best

Steve

Woooo hoooo! Thanks to everyone who contributed all that time and creativity, and made this a very enjoyable (and educational) excercise. Lots of discussion, plenty of opinions, and a little controversy too. Probably not much enlightening in my steps, but here they are (as best as I can recollect):

1. Clean-up and re-construction layer - almost all clone tool stuff (built glasses too).
2. Neat Image to smooth (my b&w restore would still need a lot more work).
3. Unsharp mask filter (20-50-0) to sharpen and boost levels and contrast.
4. This is the one most would have preferred I skipped. I used the Rough Pastel filter (with stroke settings at minimum) to get the canvas texture. I applied this on the b&w image in the hopes that it would affect how the colour and strokes went on after (some areas showing thru more than others).
5. Colourized using new layers set to colour, and used fill & masks to paint large areas and low opacity brushes to paint smaller areas (lip, rosy cheeks, eyebrows).
6. The re-do of glasses to pince nez, and the odd collar to ascot was done at this point (mostly clone again).

Thanks again, and happy trick or treating.

Congratulations Doug! Very deserving :thumbsup:

Everyone did a wonderful job on a very difficult subject - kudos to all.

- Kurt

Now that the contest is over, I'm curious to see the restored versions of this fellow, from those that went that route. Any interest? If so, I'll be happy to post mine as well.

- Kurt

post away, kurt. i think i've still got mine somewhere. i was also thinking of posting an amended final entry. well, it's no longer an 'entry', but you know what i mean :)

Craig

As you might expect, most of the time was spent healing and cloning. The coat, scarf, and shirt was borrowed from a Mr. Aaron Vanderpoel, who was kind enough to lend for this contest. Quite a bit of tailoring was needed for a proper fit.

I think my choice of a darker background only helped amplify the "cut out" look in my entry....if I had to do it over, I'd probably try something lighter.

- Kurt

Congratulations, Doug!!!

Your entry was very well done and deserving of the win.

Lorraine

Kurt,

Your restoration has really captured the face I saw, but couldn't quite get.

If I can find my restoration stage, among the several :wink: versions I worked on, I'll post it.

Lorraine

Congratulations Doug and to all who participated in this contest.

I really enjoyed this contest. I liked the 3 levels of the challenge this time, and I found it to be a great learning experience. Thanks to all of you for your votes, comments, and critiques.

I had the hardest time with the restoration part of the contest, and spent hours cloning and repairing the man, and I think I agree with some of the comments about losing the likeness of the guy. For the painting part I tried to copy the style of John Singer Sargent. I decided to use his work as reference for my “painting” style and color. I love color and probably used a little too much in my portrait for the time period that it was in.

I used the Sargent brushes and oil cloners in Painter, and then switched back to Photoshop to add paint texture and the smudge tool. My texture is paint strokes loaded onto a layer filled with 50% gray, and then set to overlay mode with an opacity adjustment. I then erased some of the strokes and also smudged them so they followed the contours of the image. The smudge tool on this texture overlay layer allows you to move paint strokes without touching the main background.

I have one of my restoration files, and one of a re-worked painting. I still have not quite captured the likeness of the man.

Cathy


:happy:

Okie,
Here is my before and after. (And.....For all you ninnies that couldn't see past the frame to vote on it I took it off for this!!!!! sheeeeesh!) ( had to get that out of my system!)

lol

Loverly

I am posting my restore only picture. I spent two weeks on this trying to restore the whole picture but eventually I gave up and cropped it.

This is my ‘clean up definite layer’ where I was sure I was right. Above this I had a ‘guess layer’ where I was not so sure. I’ve Not included my ‘guess layer’.

At first I thought I could see hands in the picture but then changed my mind and decided it was a table with a hammer or stick. There is also something on the right side of his coat but I couldn’t make it out and there is also what seems to be a white band round his waist

I expected TPaul or Doug to have the restored picture to post but this does not seem to be the case.

On the subject of the glasses. As this was a painting I thought the painter would have some ‘artistic licence’ to paint what he saw so I did not deduct points (or add them) for the glasses or for Cazubi’s fatter face.
However if this had been a restore only project the results would have been different.

I still feel that a three part project should have been marked on the three stages, and we should have all submitted three pictures for judging.

This is my second entry to a RetouchPRO competition. In the first is got no votes (which taught me a lot). In this competition I got a couple of votes (this tells me I’m improving – Thank You) But it seems that until you get into the top five you get very little feedback. This seems to me that the best get better and the rest don’t improve.

So if anyone feels like critique my picture (good or bad) please feel free.

Lorraine
If your comment was intended for me I do not understand. Please explain.

Ken

But it seems that until you get into the top five you get very little feedback. This seems to me that the best get better and the rest don’t improve.
You've got a good point there Ken. It would be good for people to post their comments on more that the top 5. I can imagine in some cases people might not want to as they may only have criticism, but in a lot of cases there are good and bad in each entry that one could quite constructively comment upon. Maybe this can simply be part of the voting process, and those that have the patience could make comments on other entries (though not necessarily rank them).

It makes me wonder if using the 'Challenges' format could be useful for these contests - it allows bigger entries (200kb), and comments against each entry. Using this, with a linked voting and discussion thread, could be the best of both worlds.

Actually I've been thinking that with the Challenges area too - I think it would get a lot more activity if there was a matching thread in the forum to go with each challenge, for general discussion and to bring attention to the fact that a new challenge image had been posted.

Loverly...I guess I was a ninnie. I am glad that you put the larger picture up, because I think that it is very good. I could not make out much detail on the entry because...the frame was so big it made the picture too small. Very nice work.

Cathy :wavey:

Cameraken, I think your restoration progress looks good. The thing that bothered me on the final contest image were the eyes. They were a little to bright and not quite integrated enough into the picture. This was such a hard contest that just finishing it makes you a winner.

Cathy :happy:

Lorraine
If your comment was intended for me I do not understand. Please explain.

Ken

Thanks and sorry about that, Ken. My post was meant for kschulz (Kurt). I've edited it.

Also, your restore is very good as well.

Lorraine

defintely an interesting contest. and congratz, doug!

here's my own restore. i purposely left the hair not quite done. i also used a new technique in doing most of this. i used almost no clone at all. instead, i used a LOT of 'push'. the idea in using push was to leave some texture and spotting to add to the texture of an oil. i used a very small brush as if painting the picture myself. this was during the restore portion of the project. you may also notice that at this point i hadnt added in the glasses stem to the left ear. not quite sure why i decided it shld have one later on.

i'm also posting the 'final' piece i wish i had posted instead of what i did. i noticed too late some flaws in the one i did post.

great contest. i too liked the stages aspect of this contest. very challenging.

Craig

First of all, Congratulations to Doug , nicely done!!!!! :thumbsup:

Thanks to everyone that offered comments about my entry, all really appreciated and helpful.

Kurt: Your guy was one of my very favorites. I would have had it in my top 5 but I couldn't get past the cutout look.

Lorraine: Yours was also one of my favorites. The only thing that kept it out of my 5 was that his hair didn't quite look like the original.

I've attached my restoration. Call me sick and twisted, but I kind of like cloning, and I knew I would have to do a fairly decent restoration. I couldn't go straight to painting like some of you talented folk. It's interesting to me how it's so easy for the appearance of a person to change with just a little manipulation. I think my guy started to look like Roger Ebert! :confused:

I knew all along that the glasses would be an issue. There was no evidence of a "temple" piece on the right but I could see something of a hinge on the left. Couldn't find anything conclusive when I googled "spectacle", so I mistakenly went with full glasses. Had I known how to animate, I would have made it there, and then disappear. :lol:

I agree with all of the constructive criticism about my entry, so I have tried to go back and change some things. I'm attaching a "fixed" version and would appreciate knowing if you think it's an improvement. :)

Everybody who gave this one a shot deserves a pat on the back. :bigthmb:

Annabel

Congratulations Doug !!

A truly deserved win ! So, OK doesn't QUITE look like oil painting but IMHO the most outstanding feature of your submission is the feeling that you made it with the man right in front of you, it looks so real !! From the moment I saw it I knew it had to be the winner or be among the 5 finalists.

So there are 10 and all good ! I am (sort of) glad that could not post mine on time as I would not have known to pick just 5.

Congratulations to all !!

Martha :wavey:

Loverly...I guess I was a ninnie. I am glad that you put the larger picture up, because I think that it is very good. I could not make out much detail on the entry because...the frame was so big it made the picture too small. Very nice work.

Cathy :wavey:

lol..ahhh one "ninnie" confession! Thanks for the compliment!
I did have a look at it on the screen of a desk top computer and it looked fine to me size wise so I don't know what all the fuss was about really.
Some people didn't even complete the details of the man and they were included in some voters top 5 votes! Go figure? 1.restore the photo.( what part of that means leave out details or make him look totally different than the photo?) 2.turn into an oil paiting. (this part seemed like a free for all) lol

My vote on this matter is that the voting should not be done by the participants at all since the contest seemed to evolve into something different than the initial rules but should be voted on by other fellow digital restorers on this site.

Hugs,
Loverly
p.s. Congrats to Doug.

Loverly,

I really do like your larger version better than the one you used in the contest. There are far more details that I can see. The frame you chose for your entry is very much the period of that photo. But, since our entries are already limited to such a small size, your work stands out so much more the larger version.

Lorraine who likes both. :knockedou

freddianne,

Thanks so much for your comment on my entry. I think that when I got to the hair, I was just too tired and too busy to give anymore time to this.

Congrats to you on placing third. This was a very difficult contest.

Lorraine

Lorraine, thanks for the compliment on my restoration. If you had "rested up" before doing the hair, yours probably would've made my top 5 list too! :wink:

Cazubi, I meant to comment on yours when I voted, but forgot to. Your painting was just beautiful! I really liked the style you chose. I based my votes more on accuracy of restoration, and the likeness just didn't match the vision I had of the fellow, but your painting effect was great.

Craig, very interesting technique you describe - and very effective. Amazing what you were able to do without cloning. Great job!

Loverly, for what it's worth the frame wasn't much of a factor for me, but I can definitely see where it may have been a distraction, especially since it takes up valuable pixel real estate. No fuss - just the way it is. I prefer your version without the frame - excellent work!

Freddieanne, I *really* liked the painting effect you achieved on yours. Can you tell how you went about it? Excellent restoration too - especially the eyes and hair.

kurt, thanks :) it was an interesting test.

and for your kind words i'll say something about yours.... brace yourself, i didnt say i'd say something nice ;)

actually, you did an excellent job on the restore. love everything below the chin! and i agree with your own comments about the dark background. there are two main things i see with the restore that i think could have been better. the face is a bit clone-smudgy. not much, but it shows a bit. and the hair lacks detail. i'm guilty of this last one myself. otherwise a very fine job!

Craig

Great job everyone. I too think it would be helpful for comments outside of the top 5... this was my first attempt at a restoration, and I know I personally could benefit from comments (no matter how harsh...)

PhotoB,

Don't know if I'm worthy to comment, but I guess everyone has an opinion. :normal: My unpretentious thoughts...

Pros: I felt the painting effect in your entry was just outstanding. It shows much artistic flair and natural talent. The impressionistic style was a brave choice, and IMHO you pulled it off very well. If I were to ignore the "restoration" requirement, yours certainly would have been high on my list.

Cons: The restoration. There are too many areas where the restoration is not true to the original; mainly the hair, collar, shirt and tie.

Sidebar: Maybe I'm too much of a technician, but when I look at many of the entries I am surprised at how little attention was given to the accuracy of the restoration. Without other specific instruction, a good restoration strives to recreate the original as accurately as possible - any deviation and it's less of a restoration and more of a retouch.

It's obvious to me that the "make it an oil painting" aspect of this contest introduced a fair amount of confusion. From the comments, some interpreted this to mean that "artistic license" can abound, even if it detracts from the accuracy of the restoration. However others saw the restoration as an equally important aspect which didn't allow room for many of the liberal interpretations. Very interesting dynamics came out of this one :!:

kschulz: Thanks for your comments. I think that you did a very nice job on your restoration. You really achieved a good likeness. I think what that if it had a different kind of background and a little less "cut out" look that it would have looked more like a portrait. Very nice work though.

PhotoB: This was one of our hardest contests, so kudos to you for taking it on. I think that you probably could have used a little better restoration base to start, and your paint method eliminated some important features such as the eyes and nose. Good attempt.

Cathy :happy:

Thanks Steve, Kurt, Lorraine, Cathy, Craig, Annabel, Martha and Loverly for the congrats.

Kurt - An excellent restoration, and I like the bg. The only problem I see is the slightly blurred facial features and hair.

Cathy - great re-do. I think the conservative colouring suits him better, and the lip job does the trick in the likeness dept.

Loverly - I liked your entry with the frame, and thought it was a good fit with your painting and the period, but I also like the larger image.

Ken - I think your 'definite' layer recovers all the important details very faithfully. Some of the shadow patches on his face are maybe too patchy for a photo, but would work well as a painting style (maybe palette knife). I'm not sure there's much going on at the bottom of the original other than chemistry.

Craig - I like the results of your push technique on your restore, and in your painting I really like the realistic complexion you achieved. Would liked to have seen a bit more of the push strokes and facial details in the painting.

Annabel - while I like the specs, I still prefer the original's hawkish nose and the hi-lighted area between eye and ear.

PhotoB - I saw this as a watercolour, and a very nice painting at that, (keep in mind that this is coming from someone who thought his own pic looked oily). I thought there were two levels of clarity in your pic, either of which would have been acceptable if applied consistently - the face seemed to lack the definition and detail that was evident in the suit. I really liked the earthy colours you used, and the 'likeness' would have been very good if not for the eye and nose.

About the contest. I agree with Kurt about the confusion and interpretation thing. The 'restore' part seems clear enough, even with T Paul's clarification that "If you want to restore by painting that will be acceptable. The key is that it must be a finished full-color oil painting--so the missing parts and so on must be corrected". If you take 'restore' as a strict requirement then the dark bg's, and even anything that looked painted, would be eliminated. That's why I interpreted the restoration loosely as: 'try to preserve the recognizable details that were there' (what he looked like, and what he wore). A painting of a photo cannot be an accurate restoration unless it doesn't look like a painting at all (super realism). Since the 'key' was 'finished full-color oil painting', some restoration aspects had to be sacrificed.

'Colourize and oil paint' were assumed by many to mean 'Colourize and oil paint in the manner of common 19th century portrait painters. This was a logical approach, but I didn't see it as a requirement. Again I interpreted the oil painting part as an intentionally broad rule, intended to attract a variety of painting styles and approaches - I might be wrong on that one.

My take on the contests in general are that the rules have been short and sweet and not too specific because it allows for entries to compete on criteria other than just 'technical skill' (especially for contests that are not restore only). I also think the voting by participants allows for an appreciation of how different people weigh things like imagination, style, colour and form etc. differently. By design or accident this is the kind of contest it is, and I think most who take part are content with how the format is evolving. Maybe a poll or vote would settle this question?

I'd also like to see the challenge format utilized to address file size and comment issues. I like the idea of a post vote re-do too (maybe excluding the top 5?). But changes like these probably require a lot of time and resources that may be in short supply.

doug,

thank you for the comments. the push technique somewhat evolved out of talking to palms1 about smudge painting in another thread, and somewhat from trying at first to bypass the restore work and go directly to painting to restore and paint. that didnt last long :) but i did find the push technique interesting once i'd tried it. and yes, i agree it didnt manage to translate over into the 'oil' portion very well. it was my original intent that it would, but i didnt quite make it.

i was pleased with the complexion also. i consider myself a fairly poor 'colorizer'. so, i was happy with that also.

and i also agree with your lost detail comment. i knew this also and even tried to correct for this late in the contest. not quite sure where i lost the detail. i even went back and looked and couldnt quite figure out my workflow (lost command history in saves) and all the layers and blends and whatnot.

if we were doing this again using the same image and same rules, i'd certainly do some things differently.

and, since we're critiquing, 'groucho' needs some work ;)

Craig

Lorraine, I know exactly what you mean about getting burned out on this one. :dizzy: There were some things I got the same way about.

Kurt, Thanks! Turning this into art was the big unknown part of this challenge for me. After I'd finished the restoration and colorized it, I just started messing around with Impressionist. I've tried to recreate what I did and this is close:
-1st layer - Imp - djr Oil 24
settings: image,63,95,73(roughly)
layer mask to bring back a little detail in places
May have lowered opac??
-2nd layer - Imp - Paint-smudges-soft paper
settings: image,25,64
again, a layer mask for detail in places and to
smooth out some effects.
Really pretty basic stuff.

Cathy, I really like the new colors in your rework.

Doug, Thanks, I appreciate your input. After a while I lose perspective and start second guessing and trying to get it better. Again, your likeness was awesome, so I know it can be done!!!

Annabel

Hi everyone,

I know I'm late to the party but congrats to Doug. A worthy winner. :bow:

Thanks to everyone that voted for me. I'm no longer a contest virgin. :grin:

Can't wait to view all the ghoulish entries in the October contest. Hope at least one of them scares the pants off me.

Cheers
John