I tried to assess the images on these criteria:
First off - faithful to the original photo - there were some clever retouches in there (Ms Bay - very cute!), but I didn't consider they were eligible for a restoration vote.
Then I was looking for:
Realistic and appropriate eyes for the baby.
Realistic hand added
Tear repaired seamlessly
Boy's leg stain removed
Background not too noisy but retaining detail
Clothing clean and with some realistic, but faithful, detail.
Once I allocated votes for these I was down to about a list of 7. Filtering this down to 5, and sorting those 5 proved very tough though.
I finally had to factor in 'gut feeling' because though some of the entries got better votes on the point system, I simply found others had a better overall impression.
1. FreddieAnne - really liked this. The hand is a little blurry and the stain on the boy's leg hasn't been repaired. Good attempt to add some subtle texture and detail to the clothes though, and I like the overall effect - the picture is clean but still retains a lot of detail (for instance the weave on the carpet) and still retains the feel of the original.
2. Well this position changed half a dozen times! Finally settled on pictureman. Though he wasn't in my initial top 5, after a while it grew on me. The baby's eyes are great, though the boys hand is a bit small for his body I thought. Overall the picture still has a lot of noise, in both the background and clothing. Yet I decided the fact that the detail of the children's faces were faithfully retained overrode this concern to an extent. There was also a degree of whimsy which I liked in framing the still somewhat dirty image in an old fashioned cardboard frame.
At this point I wish I could give tied 3 to the rest - because I found it next to impossible to pick! Still....
3. Suchyy. Overall the image was a little soft and the clothing was a bit blown out. Also I thought the eyes were a bit big for the baby's face, though they did suit the face well. Overall the picture just 'worked' though, and the tear and cleaning up the background were very successful. Probably the biggest weakness was the clothing - the toughest part I thought! And the softness of the image (the hand was a little strangely shaped but acceptable)
4. Doug Colwell - Everything worked in this picture - and in fact got my highest score in terms of successfully fixed elements. I thought the clothing may have been augmented a little too much though, and the children seemed to have developed slightly sinister expressions along the way!
5. Flora. As always an excellent job from Flora. My only corcerns, but they were keys ones for me, was that the faces seemed somewhat retouched - having rosy cheeks that were not apparent to me in the original, and the eyes of the baby were a little too big and doll like for my taste. One of the few to fix that leg stain though!
Phew - if anyone has read this far - congratulations to all - I think the most challenging of contests we've had yet! Just by having the guts to attempt it everyone deserves an award!
I have really enjoyed watching all of the entries come in, and appreciate seeing the different styles of work. What I looked for in the entries was a picture that still retained the vintage photo look, and was repaired as seamlessly as possible. The eyes were especially important because they had to be replaced and need to be proportional and blended. Here are my votes:
1. pictureman33: It has a nice vintage look, and not over-worked. The baby’s face looks soft and natural.
2. Caitlin: Very clean, excellent restoration. The baby’s face looks perfect.
3. freddieanne: It keeps the vintage feel, and is very nicely restored. The eyes on the baby are very natural.
4. Doug Colwell: Very nice restoration, and the baby’s eyes are natural and placed very well.
5. Gary Richardson: Very vintage feel, but very nicely restored. Your baby’s face and eyes are excellent.
First of all I would like to say that i really like this kind of competition and I will surely take part in future parts.
It is not easy to choose best picture because they are very different and I do not know which version I like the most
After many minutes of thinking... here is my vote:
1. Flora - smooth, but not blured. It is just as sharp as it should be in my opinion (eg. I really like pictureman's work but it is to grainy (probably because of sharpening) ) Ahh, I almost forgot - I like the color.
2. Caitlin - I do not like the color, but everything else seems to be fine.
3. Jaime - Different from Flora's and Caitlin's images but I like it too. Everything is very sharp and distinct. Though I like overall contrast I think clothes are too bright and boy's pants are too dark.
4. Pictureman33 - Very nice but too grainy.
5. Doug Colwell - everything is just OK
Forgive me all mistakes I could have made, I am still learning English. Reading is all the time easier then writing
#1-Caitlin- Very accurate to the original photo. Pleasant in contrast and color
#2-Flora-Excellent as always and accurate to the original
#4-Jaime- Excellent but I thought it was too sharp; contrasty
#5-Suchyy- Perhaps a little too soft.
An excellent and challenging contest.
The baby's eyes seem to be the make or break point in this one, and of course everyone here is looking at them very closely. The eye copies seemed to work for me if they were adjusted a bit so the copy wasn't so obvious. Kudos to those who built them from scratch whether they worked, or didn't quite.
1. Caitlin - sharp, clean, nice sepia and baby's eyes very well constructed. Like the boy's shoe detail too.
2. Cazubi - tones and detail work look great. Just a little noisy.
3. Flora - strong, dramatic tones and contrast, just not sure about the eye and cheek highlights.
4. Freddieanne - very nice detail in clothing and baby's eyes, but boy's pants, stockings and shoes seem too black compared to the other dark areas.
5. Suchyy - dramatic tones and contrast in this one too, just a little smudgy (looks like the chair rail had a whoops).
Congrats to all the entrants! This one was really hard because there was so much good work here. Personally, I did my voting in this order: baby's face, children's clothes detail, other background detail and overall cleanup. How natural the photo looked for it's time period made a big difference in my voting also. Here goes!
5. Racc Iria
First of all congratulations to all who entered the contest, not an easy one to judge.
The things I looked for were, sympathetic restoration of the figures faces, maintaining overall feel of piece, alignment of picture segments and general clean up of image.
1st Caitlin, liked pretty much all that she's done, with two exceptions. Didn't like the particular sepia tone used, and girls shoe needed a little work (I missed this area on my restore as well). But those aside, it was a very well restored piece. Noise reduction was good, without blurring and softening the image, as so many did.
2nd Flora, as you would expect, Flora's eye for detail was clearly evident in her restore. She cleaned up and brought out things others didn't. However, for me, the image was overall a little soft, and that's why I put her in second place.
3rd Cazubi, really liked this image, however, it needed sharpening a little, and some noise reduction would have improved it greatly.
4th Pictureman33, had to crop the frame off this one before I could judge it, found the frame too distracting. But, I liked his treatment of the baby's face in particular. Again, needed some noise reduction, and the shirt of the boy and baby's dress were just a touch blown out on my monitor.
5th Doug Colwell, didn't really like his treatment of the baby's face, and despite an otherwise excellent restore, that moved it down to 5th for me. A bit oversmoothed for my taste too.
|Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)|
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Oct 07 Contest Votes||T Paul||Contests||21||11-04-2007 09:06 AM|
|Apr 07 Contest Votes||T Paul||Contests||18||04-30-2007 08:22 PM|
|Feb 07 Contest Votes||T Paul||Contests||16||02-27-2007 05:14 PM|
|Jan 07 Contest Votes||T Paul||Contests||19||01-31-2007 09:30 PM|
|Feb 06 Contest Votes||byRo||Contests||28||03-01-2006 07:15 AM|