I think I'm getting the hang of colorization, but I often hit a roadblock. That is deciding what colors to use.

I have a scan of a photo of my grandfather taken some 100 years ago. He was born in 1899 if you want to guess. I've prepped it to the point where I'd be comfortable starting to add some color -- i.e. reducing the grain impact, bringing in detail in highlights, slight sepia tone, etc. It's generally at this point that I get stuck. What colors are appropriate? All I know is that he was Irish (nee Kelley).

Here's what I've done (the original on the left is 100% size of my .tif source.) I've no problem with skin tones, but eyes, hair and clothing is up for guessing. How do y'all choose colors for something like this?

(BTW, I use Ulead's PhotoImpact 8 as my primary editor.)

Nice picture! I'm guessing that because the eyes are rather light, the eye color is blue or green. Brown eyes generally photograph darker. Now we get to the hair. Are there any redheads in the family that would be directly related to him? The hair appears maybe a little too dark to be blonde. Could also be light brown. These are strictly guesses. Now to the clothing. You should be able to find vintage clothing (or reproductions) online. Check them out for possible color usage for the period of time. Others might have different opinions, and I'd like to see what others have to say. Welcome to RP! :)

Ed

Very good correction. I would choose balanced, nearly sepia colorization, just some tiny differences in color. His dress is well detailed, so, if we add too much color, it would be distracting.

Yes, it is a pretty nice photo, Ed. I'd probably go with blue eyes -- just because I have blue eyes. As far as hair, hard to say, he was an only child, but all/most of his younger half-siblings (7 of them) were quintessential freckle-faced redheads. Of course he didn't have much hair left by the time I came along :dizzy:

I did look for vintage clothing, but most of what one can find is women's wear -- not much for men. It looks like for the most part, colors were very "earthy", muted, if you will. It sure is a crapshoot, innit? Any sources anyone might have would be appreciated.

OnAir, I always try to get a good base, thanks. Your go is probably quite close. I like it, but still feel more color is justified. I guess it's just a matter of educated guessing :confused:

Anyone else like to give it go? Y'all sure are helpful and supportive...

hair and eyes you've already covered, but blue and light brown seem ok to me. on his suit, as a guess, i'd say wool or wool-like, and that, for that time period, means black, with the lace as white. so, that's easy enough. so, the only real question here is not what color but how much. i like On_Air's, but i tend to agree, a bit more would be appropriate. if you can find any of the older 1900 to 1940 era photos where they were hand colored by the studio where they were taken, this is the way i would go. the colors are obvious, but a bit muted and often a bit grainy. my folks have some of these and if i have a scan of one somewhere, i'll try and post it for reference.

having just checked what i have on hand, i dont seem to have any of that type currently. i've got some old proofs, but those are different.

craig

Craig, you say, "...and that, for that time period, means black, with the lace as white. so, that's easy enough."

But is it? In another thread, Vikki wrote, "Finally, it doesn't appear as if you've colored his shirt. You'll have to add color to that, as nothing should be left gray."

I asked what should be done in the case of the white shirt, but got no reply. That confused me a bit.

Well for better or worse, this is what I came up with. Is there anything I might have done to make this even better?

that's a DAMN fine job!

i completely forgot about the shirt. as a guess, i'd say it wasnt blue, but more white-ish... but that's just a guess. one reason i say not blue is because i was coached in my early years not to wear blue with brown. so, if the coat is brown, the shirt likely isnt blue. however, i still believe the coat was originally very dark, probably black. and i'm not quite sure why you would 'leave nothing gray', but then she was talking about the shirt. if the original was gray, then leave it gray. if it was black, leave it black. but then, i'm not a colorizer either.

i like the eye color and the hair looks to be a compromise between those leaning towards red and those leaning towards light brown. i'd say it's also a good choice.

i'd say your skin tones are marvelous. the shading on the face is good; maybe just a shade dark on that one side, but good.

i think you lost a little texture in the coat. if i'm right about the wool, the coat would have a bit more of a fuzzy look to it. not much; brushed wool wasnt very fuzzy, but it did have texture. your coat is just a bit smooth. and maybe it's because of the smoothness, but the color of the coat seems a bit too saturated; not much and like i say, it may just be the smoothness fooling me there.

i love that you brought out the detail of the lace, the face, and shirt. great job there.

overall, i'll repeat..... DAMN fine job!

craig

I'l put my five kopeck :) Agree with Kraellin, really looks fine. Agree again, I'd choose the color for his shirt more warm gray, but not bluish. Also for the background could be good, if you will add some blue (less reddish, than now and lighter a little) around his head, very tiny, just to feel the difference. Also you lost some color in upper left corner. I would make it more yellowish. Thus, you willl make it less flat. Anyway, what you did is great:)

Craig, after reading your post, I toyed with it somemore and agree with your assessment. I made the shirt more of a light tan and the jacket less red, more brown (almost black) and added some texture with grain. I won't bother showing as I'm sure you know what I mean.

OnAir, the background is almost completely replaced with one of the painted portrait backgrounds I have. The lighter "blotch" in the upper left bothered me as it seems to be a background light misdirected -- made the photo look unbalanced. I purposefully went with cooler blue, which recedes and brings more dimension to the photo. This is all so subjective.

I really appreciate your feedback.

Lonnie,

You did an awesome job with the coloring! I'm having a hard time creating realistic skin tones. Could you tell me what steps you used to color the skin, or perhaps post a link?

Thanks,
Kevin

lonk,

well, i'd still like to see it. your work is exemplary and worth showing. what little 'criticisms' i made were minor compared to the overall work done. so, i'd love to see it and in a slightly larger version if possible.

craig

Thanks, MajorSONAR. I’ve done only about a dozen colorizations, so I’m not really qualified to teach you much. Furthermore, I use PhotoImpact, which apparently few others use. The steps I use probably wouldn’t be of much help to you if you use another editor.

I can say, though, that I think it’s most important to begin with a solid base with a full range of tones. The more time I spend optimizing my base, the better my final results. Then, for skin/hair colors, my biggest asset is Bruce’s Skintones Color Chart and Hair Color Chart (found http://www.retouchpro.com/pages/colors.html). I primarily use a Colorize Pen tool to paint the color on a selection object, then tweak it with hue/sat and opacity adjustments. On top I overlay a gray adjustment layer to selectively darken/lighten or add minor color accents. “The devil’s in the details!”

I’m sure you can get some excellent guidance from the fine folks here at RP if you post some of your efforts. That’s certainly how I’ve learned.

OK, Craig. Here's the alternate colorization. Sadly, it loses a lot in the translation to JPEG. I'd love to show you something larger, but alas, this is the size of my original source. I do try to work on an enlarged version, but it is really sad with aweful JPEG artifacts, etc.

lonk,

excellent! spot-on!

and thank you for the extra posting!

craig

Top-notch job, Lonnie! The colors look great!! I really like the choice of background too. Very nice.

I want to thank y'all for the kudos. Ya really know how to boost someone's ego! I don't know any of ya from Adam, but when I see such responses from folks with 1000's of posts on this board, I expect they've seen and done a heck of lot more than I have. You've certainly given me impetus to charge ahead.

I have 100's of old family photos in various states of "abuse". Here's my next challenge. It's the same fella, a few years later, posing with his grandparents who essentially raised him. They'd be my great-great-grandparents! The photo was probably taken around 1912. Yes, this is the full size I have to work with (converted to JPEG for RP). The original is a scan in TIF format weighing in at about 650KB. The grain artifacts look to be a real joy to overcome. If anyone would like to take a shot at it, be my guest.

This is your picture after running Neat Image on it.

That's certainly a striking improvement, Phil. I've been seeing a number of references to "Neat Image". Is that a PS function or plugin? I wonder if I could use it with PhotoImpact. I guess I better do some research, eh?

This is what I came up with, partially through my process for establishing a good colorization base. I haven't reduced grain as much as you did, but I think I got a bit more detail in the highlights which I find helps later.

http://www.neatimage.com/

Just a few comments about choosing colors. A great place to get ideas is to look at paintings, or color portraits.
When choosing skin colors, don't limit yourself to one particular color (no one's face is one single color, unless you're in a Willy Wonka movie). The same color theory goes for everything else in the image as well.
If you're going to be coloring a lot of images, it might be worthwhile to check out some sites offering information about period styles, color, and fashion.

Hope you don't mind a critique on the Neat Image technique....
For some reason, it looks as just the skin has been smoothed and softened, while the clothing looks crisp. I would try to even that out, so that the texture/noise/grain is more uniform.

All that said, here's my version.

Another filter that works with your photo besides Neat Image is Photoshops (CS-2) Surface Blur. I used a Radius of 11 and a Threshold of 30 on your photo.

Neat Image is a noise reduction plugin. there is a free version, which can only be used as a stand-alone program, and the pro, pay-for version, which can be used stand-alone or as a plugin. it's a good program, but has a bit of a learning curve to it. you'll see it mentioned on retouch a LOT.

however, since going to paint shop pro 9 (and now 10), i prefer the routine for noise reduction in it. it's called 'digital camera noise removal' and is as good as or better than Neat Image and has a smaller learning curve.

you'll also want to check out Polaroid's Dust and Scratch removal program. this one is a free plugin from Polaroid and can also be used as a stand-alone.

i'm attaching two images here. the first is one using just psp's digital noise removal. in this one i attempted to remove as much noise as possible using just it and nothing else. the second is one using digi noise removal AND polaroid's D&S. the point being here that often a combination of programs using a bit less strength in each can produce a better effect than just the one when used at a higher strength.

psp does a great job by itself, but you have to sometimes do a lot 'blending' to get it all. polaroid uses a different method and by itself will tend to do a lot of blurring and blending to get all the noise as well. but, when the two are combined and you dont try to do it all with one program, this can often work very well together.

notice in the first one that there is a fair amount of smudging in order to get rid of the noise. and in the second one that there is more detail. also notice by doing an overlay of these two images, that the one using the polaroid has a tendency to wipe out some areas. this could have been prevented by using a mask or selection. i didnt here just for the sake of demonstration. the wiping of some areas was from the polaroid plugin because of the way it does its routine. even with fairly low settings this is going to happen in the polaroid one as a plugin. as a stand-alone you can adjust the mask in d&S and prevent this. as a plugin you are expected to mask first and then use the routine. so, it's a bit tricky at times.

craig

Thanks all for the suggestions and tips. I'm off to DL Neat Image and the Polaroid tool and try them out.

Here's my final result. How'd I do?

Great work!!!

Does neatimage works on Mac?

Very well done! Your colorization has developed individuality of people on the photograph, especially red-headed boy behind. Clothing looks very nice also. Did you have a sample for the chosen colors?

Lonk very nice. The colors are very pleasing to me.

StudioJ. Neat Image is available for the Mac.

Thanks guys.

Yes, studioj, NeatImage is available for Mac on their site. I didn't use it on this though. I did run it through Kodak GEM once.

OnAir, I used different skin tones for each to differentiate. I had no color samples for anything. It's all just guessing. I did take advice given in this thread and looked at many painted portraits of that time period to get a feel for appropriate colors. Also, since I was a portrait photographer for 15 years, I know people rarely dress to compliment each other for a group photo. They dress for their own tastes only -- of course in those days, most country folk only had one set of "Sunday best", so it wasn't really a matter of choice. I tried to similate that kind of situation a bit. As a cabinet maker for another 15 years, I figured the chair was red mahogany, so went with that to base my color choice. The colors in the rug seemed likely for that style of weave -- kind of persian. Hair was a toss-up. Gray is a real PITA. The tints in the background were chosen based on classically stylized painted portrait backdrops. In the end I felt it all came together quite realistically and most certainly an improvement on what I had to work with.

Just a few comments about choosing colors. A great place to get ideas is to look at paintings, or color portraits.
When choosing skin colors, don't limit yourself to one particular color (no one's face is one single color, unless you're in a Willy Wonka movie). The same color theory goes for everything else in the image as well.
If you're going to be coloring a lot of images, it might be worthwhile to check out some sites offering information about period styles, color, and fashion.

Hope you don't mind a critique on the Neat Image technique....
For some reason, it looks as just the skin has been smoothed and softened, while the clothing looks crisp. I would try to even that out, so that the texture/noise/grain is more uniform.

All that said, here's my version.

Vikki, I love the colors and tones in this version on his face and hair.

ok, lonk, how nit-picky do you want me to get here ;)

first off, i'll say i doubt i could do any better. my problem is that i can see better than i can correct, so take anything i say on this with that in mind. it's currently my biggest frustration that i cant meet what i know shld be, which may be why i get so nit-picky with others ;)

i'll just mention a couple of things to start. i doubt her blouse has any violet in it, but there is a violet cast in there in your image. the boy looks really good. the man's white beard looks just a tiny bit pasted on and the same with that shock of hair on his right side... too much contrast between the hair and surriounding areas. there also seems to be a bit too much orange in the old man's face. the woman's face is a bit too pasty.

all that being said, it's still a very good job and like i mentioned earlier, far better than what i could do myself. if i were grading it i would give it an A- .

and vikki, that is an excellent job!

craig

Thanks Craig & Skyarcher!


LonK, nice work on the carpet.
Have to agree with Craig about the violet cast, although it may not be so much of a cast, but rather that all of the clothing seems to be a shade of plum (violet). That color would be fine for women's clothing, but not sure if it was available in men's.

One thing that really detracts from the photo is the background. There appears to be some color banding, in a sort of rainbow effect, and in general too smooth.

A good excercise for those doing colorizing: open a color image. Duplicate the image and close the original. Now desaturate your duplicate, and colorize it. When you've finished, bring up the original, and compare. You'll quickly see what needs to be modified in your coloring technique.

I'm almost afraid to post my two cents worth on the colorizations because the detail work is very good. The color of the boy's shirt is pretty much spot on. I'm guessing as a fiber artist that the shirt (based on what I can see of the weave) is linen. Unless linen is bleached, the color is usually blond, just like the picture. Good job.

On the woman's dress in the second colorization...Dyes at the time this picture was taken would not be those colors of purple; and if purple at all would be more muted and/or earthy, such as produced by logwood. Aniline dyes (coal tar) were not invented until 1856 by an English chemist named William Perkin, who created a color he named mauve. Her dress is most likely a subdued black, dark brown, or dark blue. But then again, I might be wrong. Mauve was a very popular color once it caught on with the general populace.

I know. I know. Too much information and none of it very relevant.

Keep up the good work.

Janet

I just get this pic of my wife's parents, very damaged.

I'll clean all and make a new pic, but just for fun, I wish to see if someone can guide me with the colors.

I was thinking on doing it b/w, but now that I see your job, I'll try to colorize like you guys.

lonnie,

i looked at your work at little closer today. it really is an excellent job. but i thought i'd try and put my money where my eye is and try some of the things i mentioned regarding your work.

it didnt take long to realize that the image itself has some problems, the main being that it's a bit too small for great detail work. the reason i say this is that there are a number of 'jaggies' in the various lines within the image. this is often due to not having enough pixels to work with and the lines just dont anti-alias and dither very well. a smoothing/softening/blurring brush can help there. so that was one of the first things i did. i also used the same brush to blend the gentleman's beard into his skin a bit and the same on his head hair along with a few other places. this reduces the stark contrast down a bit.

i also desaturated her blouse and skirt quite a bit; not fully, but mostly. this was done with a selection and the hue/saturation filter.

i also added a bit of texture back into the skirt and the man's suit. this was done with a selection and 'add noise' filter.

i added a bit more shading into the woman's face for more contrast, but reduced the shading in the man's face a bit. i wanted more consistency between all the facial shadings across the boards. they just didnt seem to match up, one to the other. i somewhat used the boy's shading as a reference.

i also clone fixed one small area in the carpet where it was blurred.

i also sharpened all the eyes just a bit.

i also lightened the man's suit and the woman's skirt a bit and just a tiny bit of the boy's where it was the darkest. this seemed to be more in line with the original lighting.

i did leave just a tiny bit of violet in the woman's clothing. i did this on purpose as blacks tended to never be true blacks with dyes in clothing. they tended to be very dark purples, but this may not be correct in this case. so, i just guessed.

the work is 98% yours and again, i think it's an excellent job. when you get down to this point you can see from the various comments others have made that a lot of opinion starts entering in, including mine. you can see in the forums with the various challenges and contests that if 16 folks work on the same image, there will always be differences. so, always bear that in mind, including my opinions and choices here.

and also bear in mind that we here in this forum tend to be perfectionists, or at least strive for that and are generally far more observant and therefore critical, than any client. had you obtained the original from my mother, for example, and then shown her the before and after, she would have gone, "Wow!" and nothing more :) so, frankly, i've loved your pieces and do hope you continue. you've got the knack.

craig

I've been on here for some time and the more I watch the more discouraged I become. Mind you that doesn't mean that I'm going to stop trying but everytime I see your pictures come out so well, and you talk about this techique or use of that tool, I think that I may never come to a place of excellence. (Challenge 81 was one of my best works) Still there are layers and masks, filters and actions.... so much it's mind boggling. Isn't there one very good place of information to start as a beginner, in language that can be understoond?

Hi KlassyLady:
I am so glad you posted what you have. I feel the same way, and have for a long time now!! I want to say that... (and this is not just a kiss up) .. Except for one instance I have been helped by the nicest people on any forum I have been a part of. People are so willing to help and do all they can to do so. The problem for me and I bet a lot of other newbies who come here seeking help is not really understanding a lot of the functions in photoshop they offer as solutions to completeing the work, where they are, and how they may be applied to certain works we wish to do in photoshop.

This place amazes me, the work being done amazes me. I do not think anyone will disagree with me that Flora is one of the most talented users of photoshop and does some pretty amazing restores of old pictures. Not to mention her wonderful personality and her willingness to help when no one else was able to post a reply to me ..there she was with one!! I see plenty of talented people here..Vicki , PhilBach, Ro , Ken, Danny, Cassidy just to name a few. Please forgive me I can not remember all the names as I post but there are plenty more. Not to forget my friend chrishoggy whom I have pm'ed on several occassions always receiving a kind and informative reply.

I so want to learn to do as good as the fokes here. You might say..well go find tutorials ..read ..read read..Well that does not always work for me..I am a hands on learner and then need to pose questions if stuck. And why would I want o travel to other sites when this one is inhabited by so many incrediable talented people??

I have asked before for a real beginners forum to open up for people like KlassyLady and myself whom want to learn here... from the best... Make it a starting place for new people to come and get a good footing and then be able to move on to the other forums and work out of them!! How can someone work on something which has posted ..add a adjustment level ..when we do not even know where to find it or understand it if we do know where it is!! I think I have stayed because I alway hope something like this might open and I want to be the first person in line to be there. Could this possibly happen?

I bet this will open a big discussion both pro and con ..but I finally got the nerve to speak up about what I feel everytime I come here..admiration but mostly FRUSTRATION ..at not being able to do what people post to do to achieve the results I want!! Mind you I am not an idiot and have some knowledge of photoshop and can do some things but others I am unfamiliar with and can not!!

I do not know if this makes sense to anyone but me..but I did have to post what has been in my mind and heart for a long time now!! Thanks for your TENDER responses in whatever you are feeling about my words!!

Most of all Thanks KlassyLady for having the courage to share your frustrations as it gave me the courage to do the same!! Neb

More great comments and observations, folks. It's very much appreciated.

Kraellin: You can certainly be as nit-picky as you want. You do make some valid observations -- some things I'd never even considered. I'll gladly accept your grade of A-. After all, I'm just a hack.

Vikki: That is excellent advice for budding colorists -- desaturating an existing color photo, then re-color it. I had thought about that, but frankly, have never actually done it. Might make a good thread, eh?

Janet Petty: Your knowledge of fabrics must be a great asset. I started this thread to get a cursory knowledge of such things. I've learned a lot, but still am trying to collect more visual resources for this type of thing.

studioj: How about doing your restoration on that photo of your wife's parents, then bringing the image back for colorization discussion? I'm thinking a date would be most helpful.

Kraellin: Yeah! Put up or shut up! (Just kidding) I like what you did with the old man's face/beard/hair. That does look more natural. The rest of your tweaks I could take or leave. I have no problem with any critique. Generally, if someone offers, I can differentiate between genuinely useful advice and subjective opinion. Also, many aspects of this discussion can be attributed to minor differences in equipment and calibration. I often check my stuff on many different systems and the display can be quite different, especially when very subtle colors are being compared. I use a dual monitor system (one LCD and one CRT). No matter how hard I try to calibrate and match them, there's always a slight difference. It's just a fact of life.

klassylady25: NO, No, no. Don't be discouraged. Reread the last paragraph of Kraellin's post. Know that some of the pros here can be quite brutal. I don't think they mean to denegrate anyone's efforts or be patronizing. From what I've experienced overall, they'll respond at a level commensurate with how they perceive your skill level. Jump in head first. Learn as much as you can from their experience.

I'm on to my next challenge. "I'll be back..."

Nebgranny: Looks like our posts were near the same time, so another response.

I can't disagree with anything you said. What I find most frustrating is that I don't have or use the "Cadillac of editors", i.e. Photoshop. Indeed, there are many editors represented in these forums. My editor of choice is Ulead's PhotoImpact right now. It is very capable (as I hope I've shown), but the terminology is somewhat different from PS and it seems not be one of the more prevalent tools. I've used it for about 4 years now and I'm very comfortable with it. In addition, being a disabled retiry, living on Social Security, I'm not in a position to afford PS. And I'm interested more these days in learning and doing the tasks rather than spending my precious time on learning the idiosyncracies of another editor. I mean I really don't know what an adjustment layer is either. Translating my desires and the responses is a major stumbling block, but I try very hard to extrapolate any information offered.

I'd definitely vote for a "beginner's forum". But would it become somewhat of the blind leading the blind? For some reason I don't think the more knowledgable/experienced folks would spend much time there. Teaching is difficult, especially in a virtual community where there are no one-on-one relationships; where experience is unknown; where tool availability is unknown; where "show me" is a bit cumbersome.

It is definitely a conumdrum for those just getting their feet wet in such a diverse vocation, especially if they want to get on the fast track. I'm looking forward to what other have to say about the issue.

lonnie,

thank you!

you've taken this in exactly the spirit it was intended and i appreciate that. that we differ on some points is no surprise... apples and oranges; they're both good. if i've helped in some way, then good.

as to the subject of teaching and learning, the biggest barrier i have is i dont speak 'photoshop'. i speak paint shop pro and even there, not always well. some things just dont translate from ps to psp and vice versa. that you are working in something else, photoimpact and others are working in yet something else, like lkroll working in the Gimp, it's very easy to get confused very quickly.

some things do translate across some of the programs and maybe even a few across all of them. 'heal' in photoshop would seem to be a very similar tool to 'makeover' in psp. but these tend to be the exception and not the rule. when i first started studying here at retouch, i would try to translate these things from ps into psp. but it didnt take too long that i finally had to give this up. it was just too frustrating and often not even possible. i dont have photoshop currently so trying to learn photoshop without owning photoshop would be like trying to learn and experience flight without an airplane, and in fact, without even having the full manual, or having the manual in a different language and no translation key. this makes learning from someone like Flora, whom i also agree is one of the best, if not THE best around here, very difficult.

it's also a bit of a truism that, just because you're a good retoucher, doesnt mean you're a good teacher. tutorials are like technical writing. there is a precise science to this which is often missed by one who already knows how to do the thing. computer sotware writers tend to be the worst computer software documentors. they write code. that's their hat. but in trying to explain to someone else who doesnt know code, they tend to forget that others dont know code. so, there is a tendency to write what you know, not to write what others dont know. it takes a special awareness and talent to write something you know so that others that dont know can understand it. often, the writer just writes and leaves picking up the understanding of the words to the reader. but, in technical writing, often the reader doesnt know the words. that's the biggest stumbling block.

ultimately, it's the reader's responsibility to learn those words. the technical writer may feel like all he's addressing is his peers, others who would already be familiar with the words. or, he may have the purpose of writing to those who are unfamiliar as well. so, it's often a matter of purpose on the part of the writer as to whom he targets as his audience. an easy example of this is, if i were teaching a class to beginning photoshop students, i would not be concentrating on technique or style; i would be concentrating on tools and terminology, how they work, what they can do, and what does this or that word mean. to more advanced students, i would be concentrating more on techniques, style, the mixing of elements and so on. i would already expect them to know the tools and terms.

here on this site, we have a mix. not only is there a mix of programs being used, but a mix of student levels and teaching levels. so, it's sort of like the old schools where all the grades were in a single classroom and the students in the higher grades were expected to help the younger ones.

there is also a sort of lovable disorder here on retouch. it's somewhat like an old bookstore where the stocking of the shelves doesnt occur quite often enough and things are hither and yon. the poor old store owner cant quite keep up with keeping the A's in the A section or from ordering the same title 15 times when he's not even sold the first five yet. and here, i'm referring to the fact that we get new folks coming in all the time and asking the same old questions that have been answered 20 times, often in the same forum, already. i've seen this a fair amount recently. no one really wants to say, 'USE THE SEARCH FEATURE, you newbie!'... or maybe they do, but are too polite to do so ;)

and this is NO reproach on Doug or on any of the moderators. i love this site. i've also worked as a moderator before on other sites. keeping any sort of order and removal of redundancy is a monumental task. keeping newbies from being newbies is also a huge task. of course they shld use the search function. telling 20 new folks about Neat Image does get tedious, but so does telling them to use the search feature. and the forum stucture itself here on retouch tends to be a bit odd. there are still sections of forums i've not perused yet... i think :) i've no doubt you could double the number of moderators here and still not get completely organized. and again, this is no dig on retouchpro. it's just growing, understaffed and underpaid.

i do think it would be a good idea to have a 'new person's forum' area. i also think there shld be an area for those 'just passing through and i wanted just this one help on this one photo, thank you very much' type area. and i also have thought several times of approaching doug and suggesting a 'pay for' area. this latter would be where folks could come in, drop off their photo, tell what it is they needed and wanted, and let the 'students' here work on it. retouch would collect a fee and the 'student' would collect a portion as well. everybody wins. you can liken this to a sort of apprentice system. my folks used to take us to the dental school at the university of michigan where interning dentists would do the work under the supervision of the pros. the fees were MUCH less than a normal dentist. the students got practical experiece and the patients got a much lower bill. retouch could do the same thing.

and carrying that even further, what about teaching? could retouch offer professional courses for a fee? or, how about 'sister sites' ? sister sites are those that are more of less sponsored or sanctioned by a parent site. so, has anyone approached doug and said, 'hey, i'd like to set up a professional teaching site, but i'd like it to be affliliated or sanctioned by, retouchpro' ? or, from the student's side of things, has anyone asked any of the 'Pro's here to tutor them for a fee?

the potentials here are really quite large. so, what have you volunteered for lately? where did you want to put your time and money and products and services in order to help this site? tricky, isnt it :)

craig

To address the "frustration" aspect of following techniques.......I've seen many tutorials and instructions for different techniques that are quite convoluted, and often incorrect. It's no wonder there's frustration and confusion. I recommend getting Katrin Eismann's books, and working through her tutorials. You'll find almost everything you need to know. Once you've mastered ALL of her tutorials, you'll find you may not need the others, but if you do want to try them, you'll be better equiped.

Lonk,
Well, I had to color this image, to see what it was that was bothering me about the coloring. What I think is, there is too much NeatImage.
I've used it on this version, but not as heavily, and not with the sharpening within NeatImage.

Thanks vikki for your suggestion. I just bought the book a few weeks ago , have done a few tutorials and it is a wonderful book. I think the frustration also comes from wanting so badly to be able to do work we see posted here. I see a lot of people come and go and wonder why? Maybe they get frustrated too..but I always come back if just to see what is going on for postings. Neb

Hi Neb and KlassyLady

I do understand how you feel.
Reading the tutorials here at RP is a good start but it is not enough just to read them. You actually need to DO them and then, if you get stuck there is a discussion thread where you can post your questions.

You could do the same here in this thread. If you want to learn to colourize then there are good tutorials here
http://www.worth1000.com/tutorial.asp?sid=161018
And here
http://www.worth1000.com/tutorial.asp?sid=160986

And the one Flora and Vikki prefer is here
http://www.worth1000.com/tutorial.asp?sid=161015

Try them all and choose the method you prefer. Try them on Lonk’s picture and if you get stuck then post your questions in this thread. Someone will always help.

As Lonk has said. Teaching is difficult. But you will always find someone who will help with a specific point.

Vikki’s suggestion of Katrin Eismann's books is a good one. These books are excellent. Especially the first one.’Restoration and Retouching’.

Whatever you do. Don’t give up. The more you do then the easier it comes. Try pictures from older threads and see if you can replicate the work. You don’t need to post the results. Just try ‘em.

Hope this helps.

Ken

Never have been a quiter and have appreciated all the thoughts here, especially Neb.... Thanks girl!!

I do plan on getting the Katlin books. And I am reading the turtorials that were listed. If I can sing Italian and German, I will be able to do this too.

I will continue to learn and read from those of you here at RetouchPro, because this one of the best forums I've seen. All grown-ups here and that I like very much!!

Hi Neb and KlassyLady,

I can understand both of you more than you can imagine .... As a PS self-taught person, on opening it after installing it for the first time, I thought I had landed on Mars for what I could understand!!!! ....

English isn't my mother tongue so I tried to get an Italian version .... well, let me assure you it didn't help me one bit .... I could understand the explanations very well in both languages, but definitions and terminology were unknown to me ... no matter in what language ....

I started hunting the Internet searching for help and landed by chance at http://www.arraich.com/ps_intro.htm .... There I found (in my opinion) the most detailed 'beginners' help of all .... Snapshots of Tools, Brushes etc. accompanied the explanations on 'what', 'where' and 'how to' ... I took my first PS steps following the Tutorials found there .... I know, most of it was written for PS 7, but Tools and basic definitions and usage haven't changed much, so, I still think it's a great help to get familiar with the 'basics' even if you are 'lost' in a higher version of PS or, maybe, even for 'translating' Tools and functions for adapting them to other Software...

I know it is very frustrating when, reading tutorials, tips etc., you realize that the explanations given imply that you should know the exact path to get there, on the other hand, if for every tutorial one should take snapshots of each tool being used, its location and, possibly, describe its functions, the whole procedure would become a never-ending affair ... :o:

RP is definitely one of, if not THE best place to be in the field ... even if I have to admit that, in spite of knowing a great part of PS like my own pockets, I simply don't understand some explanations given by members with a much higher level of knowledge than I have and will ever have...

I'll talk to Doug to see if it's possible to add an 'Absolute Beginners' Forum ... even though, unfortunately, my life rhythm and localized technical problems (regular power cuts here in SA for one...) can influence the regularity of my presence at RP ... :o:

In the meantime here are some links from a google search for PS for beginners:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Articles2/2123/226/
http://www.photoshopsupport.com/tutorials/jennifer/tips-beginners.html
http://www.photosjop.com/
http://www.computer-training-software.com/photoshop-cs2.htm ... this site is about a 'Training CD' but you have very good demo files to be seen with the QuickTime plug-in ...
http://www.photoshop-tutorials-plus.com/photoshop-tutorials-1.html

Hope this helps... :pleased:

P.S. ....thanks for your kindness Neb and Craig!!!!

________

Flora and Ken : Thanks so much for the post and information posted . Going to go to the sites , as a matter of fact did go to the Beginners one Flora and it is for 7 and I have CS2 but bet they are pretty much the same ??

Flora , about the Help File ..it is not at the bottom ..it just is not there!! :angry: I do not have a clue as what happened to it!! Ken posted a site to go to to fix it , but I am afraid to try!! Thanks to All. Neb

I agree. I found some of the info on sites Flora suggested to be extremely helpful. One on curves was especially informative. Thanks, y'all!

Hi,

... so glad you found helpful info in some the links .... even more so because, for the moment, my quest for an 'Absolute Beginners' Forum hasn't been very successful ... :o:

In the meantime, I think our Education (http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=39) Forum which offers help for "Books, courses, other websites. Discussion of anything to do with learning." is the best place to use ...

This thread seems to have been somewhat hijacked - but seeing as the subject is interesting, I'll jump in too!

One of the "truths" that I have always subscribed to is that the teacher always learns more than the student. My experience here at RTP has reflected this exactly. Although I did know PS pretty well before posting here, I cannot even measure how much I have learned by tackling the questions and problems of others.
but a mix of student levels and teaching levels. so, it's sort of like the old schools where all the grades were in a single classroom and the students in the higher grades were expected to help the younger ones.Exactly! Taking your example...For this to work well - the second graders should teach the first graders, the third teach the second, and so on......

Moral: If you see a question that you think you can answer - go ahead! If you are right, you have helped someone and confirmed your knowledge (and feel good :happy: ). If you are wrong, then you will end up learning something new when a "third grader" comes along.

I'm rooting for the "Absolute Beginners"* forum along with Flora :wavey:. Not only for the beginners to have a "safe" place to post their questions, but also for the "second graders" to have a place to start their teaching careers.

Rô
(* maybe with another name - RetouchPRO 101?)

I'm rooting for the "Absolute Beginners"* forum along with Flora . Not only for the beginners to have a "safe" place to post their questions, but also for the "second graders" to have a place to start their teaching careers. i havent looked recently with the 'beginners' idea in mind, but dont we already have some of this on retouch? also, if this were to be implemented here, you'd need a beginners for photoshop, beginners for paint shop pro, painter, photo impact, art rage, deep paint, impressionist, etc. etc. you just cant really learn ps from psp or vice versa. some things translate, some dont.

also, there is no reason that 'sister' sites cant be put up by folks other than doug nelson. well, i might have to qualify that a bit. certainly you'd want to coordinate with doug for a true 'sister' site. for those that may not know what i mean by 'sister' here, i'm just talking about a sort of affiliate site. you could liken it to the children companies of a bigger company like general electric which owns other companies like rca or nbc. a sister site would be one closely associated with the parent or original, but might have a slightly different purpose or theme. in this particular case it would be a more basic learning site and perhaps a bit more structured in its learning/teaching regimen.

either way, done on retouchpro, or done as a sister site, it's a good idea. i dont have the current knowledge to handle forum software, nor is my uplink speed on my own site good enough for a larger sister site type operation, but i'd certainly be willing to help out in some other capacity.

and just as a side note to all this, i believe retouchpro's database must be getting huge by now. i've noticed a bit of slowing now and again at times. this could just be internet traffic woes, but i have seen where some forum databases get so large that they begin to bog the site down. so a sister site might well be the way to go here.

craig

I'm afraid that I was the beginning of the hijacking and thankful for all that has been said and will be.

Three years ago I lost my full time job (which I am now thankful for) and I started down the road I am now. Most of my years were spent raising my children and had only returned to work to help and keep busy. I had only worked a short time before the company folded. During that time my friend opened his doors to help him learn the editing field using Adobe Premier Pro, which I still enjoy doing. But during his teaching time he found himself in major surgery 3 times. I thought he couldn't top it after the first but he managed to top that one by having a quad bypass. Then it was a year and 1/2 before the aortic aneurysm was removed. I sat with him when his wife was at work and it was during that time I started working on pictures because he has to sleep to heal.

I found I loved working on pictures. But like most things I started at the back of the book :sad: figurativiley speaking... :happy: I have recently purchased Katrin Eismann's book (2) and will work on them but it is through RetouchPro,that I have grown.

It's important to have people to talk to. You all are wonderful. I won't name names, though I could, but know that I appreciate that have helped.

This is my morning reading material and every opportunity that I have I come here to read and learn. My Adobe library started out with one action... then two, well you get the idea.

Flora, I would be honored to be in the "Absolute Beginners Class". And when I graduate I will have the opportunity to give back what has been given... so if it happens, COUNT ME IN!!

Sincerely,

I've been following this thread, first for the interesting discussion re: colorization, then the questions posed regarding beginners here and how best to address their questions and concerns. As a quasi beginner myself (I know just enough to wander off and get realllllly good and lost :happy: ), I have admittedly been at a loss when trying to follow some of the threads and explanations as they were beyond my limited knowledge. No matter, I read anyway figuring eventually it's all going to start to come together and if I ran across a term I didn't know, well hey, the internet is fabulous for that; a quick googling and I was on my way again armed with just a little more knowledge than last time!

Exactly! Taking your example...For this to work well - the second graders should teach the first graders, the third teach the second, and so on......

I'd say we already have the 3rd graders teaching the 2nd, 1st and so on, it's just that sometimes the 3rd graders are talking amongst themselves, not realizing the 2nd graders are listening in and don't understand some of the "big words"!! I think the key is ask questions, ask questions, ask questions - whether you ask google or one of the 3rd graders. Admittedly, I have thought, "ugh, I hate to post to ask what that means. I KNOW that's something simple." so I googled, but I really doubt anyone here is going to bite someone's head off for even the simplest of questions. On the contrary, everyone has seemed only too glad to help when asked! Also, in my quest for answers or acquiring a basis to understand the more complicated threads here, I came across numerous sites that offer information along those lines. There is no shortage of photoshop tutorials out there and many of them are of the beginner variety. I'd be happy to pass along what I've found if anyone cares to have those links, but it was just a matter of conducting a search.

Wow, that was a bit more wordy than intended! Although I've been of the lurking variety here, I do want to say thanks for all the great information through the give and take between the people here. It really is a wonderful site and I'm learning so much.

Hi everybody,


Rô is right...
This thread seems to have been somewhat hijacked - but seeing as the subject is interesting, I'll jump in too! .... But since this topic has drawn a lot of interestI think it's only right to put it on its own Thread! ....

I'm going to split the Threads ... jus keep your finger crossed!!! :rambo:

Great work!!!

Does neatimage works on Mac?




i use noise ninja for mac...it's kind of pricey but there is a photoshop plugin and standalone app.