RetouchPRO

Go Back   RetouchPRO > Studio > Contests
Register Blogs FAQ Site Nav Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Contests Retouching contests to challenge your skills and learn from others. Prizes for the winners!

May 05 Contest Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 05-04-2005, 04:43 PM
Gary Richardson's Avatar
Gary Richardson Gary Richardson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 2,717
My own take on this, is to do as little as possible to change the image, whilst trying to return it to the state it was before the ravages of time and neglect worked on it.

Almost all restore work requires reconstruction, if you use the clone tool to cover a spot or blemish, you are by definition, reconstructing the image.

If this were a commissioned work, of course the clients wishes would be paramount, as its not, personal preferences and interpretations will determine the final output.

Just as personal preferences and tastes will determine the way entries are voted for.

Just want to wish everyone good luck with their entries.

PS. Chris, glad to see you reconsidered your decision, and entered after all.
Reply With Quote top
  #22  
Old 05-04-2005, 05:15 PM
byRo's Avatar
byRo byRo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Goianésia, Brazil
Posts: 1,609
I'm going to run the risk of being a boring, pedantic nit-picker here.....

Let's change our profession - instead of being photo restorers, let's be automobile restorers.....
We have two cars to restore, one is a very common model and one of unknown origin.
The first one is well-documented with original plans, drawings, photos.
The second one doesn't have any information at all, just the battered car in your hands.

The first one you can restore (
Quote:
the act or process of returning something to its earlier good condition
) but the second you just can't.
If the second is only slightly damaged then maybe nobody is going to disagree with your "restoration". But, if is badly damaged - or worse, with parts missing - then you are doing a "reconstruction" based on personal experience.
Here, of course, we are fixing up the second and not the first. There is no "original" which can be used as a base for restoration. The only information we have is the posted image and the rest is just inference and personal judgement / taste / investigation.

(just hope somebody out there will agree with my point. I need to take Duv's advice and get some sand between my toes!)

Reply With Quote top
  #23  
Old 05-04-2005, 05:24 PM
Caitlin's Avatar
Caitlin Caitlin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by byRo
(just hope somebody out there will agree with my point. I need to take Duv's advice and get some sand between my toes!)

I agree with you Ro - I thought that it would be quite clear that was the intention! I suppose describing it is a restoration, is to make it clear that we should stick to strict restoration where we can, but where we have to, we must fall back on reconstruction. So where an object is damaged, but the shape/pattern etc of the original is still visible, we must restore it to the same original form as closely as possible. However where the original is totally obliterated, there we must reconstruct.

I therefore would think this only leaves reconstruction open in this photo to missing/badly damaged body parts.
Reply With Quote top
  #24  
Old 05-04-2005, 06:15 PM
Jaime Jaime is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 70
Ethics Guidelines for photo restoration

DigitalCustom with the Alinari Archives has a model to Ethics Guidelines for the purpose of digital photo restoration, repair and reconstruction. The URL is:

http://www.digitalcustom.com/howto/r...guidelines.asp

Any opinion about this document will be appreciated.
Reply With Quote top
  #25  
Old 05-04-2005, 06:59 PM
byRo's Avatar
byRo byRo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Goianésia, Brazil
Posts: 1,609
Thank you, Jaime, that is exactly what I've been ranting on about.
Reply With Quote top
  #26  
Old 05-04-2005, 08:04 PM
Duv's Avatar
Duv Duv is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia
Posts: 1,213
Jaime, that was very interesting. Thank you.

Roland, DO keep the sand out of your shorts when you get there!

Dave
Reply With Quote top
  #27  
Old 05-05-2005, 12:56 AM
chrishoggy's Avatar
chrishoggy chrishoggy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 578
Blog Entries: 1
I view the reconstruction argument like this.
Reconstruction is part of restoration, without it restoration of damaged photos would be impossible. If you use clone once, you have used reconstruction. If you put eyes on the middle child by using a reference image or symmetrical grafting, you would still be using reconstruction. How far you take the reconstruction is your choice. Those guidelines clearly state that reconstruction within a restoration is acceptable.
2.0.2 After-acquired damage, deterioration or injury may be repaired, provided the repair is executed consistent with the principles set forth in these guidelines.
3.0.4 Reference Reconstruction: A damaged element may be reconstructed by grafting from a reference image that is a fair representation of the damaged element. Reference reconstruction should be used cautiously and care should be taken to ensure that any reference image is a reliable match.
If you look at an example of RESTORATION from that very same site, you will see that reconstruction has been used, and they call it "Grade 5 restoration". Not only that but extra hair has been added to the left side of the face, and something hanging from the hat as well. Yet the title of the page is Restoration, should that be Reconstruction??????
http://www.digitalcustom.com/post/restoration.asp

Nobody can ever claim to be right on this matter, as each person has a level that they stop restoration/reconstruction.
Reply With Quote top
  #28  
Old 05-05-2005, 01:39 AM
Gary Richardson's Avatar
Gary Richardson Gary Richardson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 2,717
My only comment here, is that the guidelines from Jaime's link refer to archival images, where the motives for restoring may not be the motives of a client.

Context is all. An archival picture is a historical document, and retaining its integrity is of prime importance. Whereas a restoration done for a client may not have to stick so rigidly to such guidelines.
Reply With Quote top
  #29  
Old 05-05-2005, 01:52 AM
chrishoggy's Avatar
chrishoggy chrishoggy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 578
Blog Entries: 1
Good point
Reply With Quote top
  #30  
Old 05-05-2005, 02:08 AM
Flora's Avatar
Flora Flora is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Milan, Italy
Posts: 2,325
Blog Entries: 3
Roland is right, unless a perfectly conserved second print of a picture exists, there is no way to 'go back to' or even to know what an 'original' was really like since 'the original' doesn't exist anymore ....

Even before reading the 'Ethics Guidelines for the purpose of digital photo restoration, repair and reconstruction' (thank you very much for the link, Jamie!) I always felt very strongly (and still do) about changing, adding or removing anything just because I didn't like it or I didn't like the 'original' composition of a picture ....

I have bored people to death with my 'quest' for 'looking for/bringing out/enhance' any detail however faded, faint etc. I could make out in a damaged picture .... but, if some 'vital' detail is damaged beyond recognition, following what I read on books about restoration or what information on this topic I found in Internet, if possible, I do 'borrow'....

Going back to Roland's car example I agree that for the 'well-documented' one we could use the term 'restoration' without any doubt ... while for the 'unknown origin' one 'fix' would be more appropriate ... but fixing the second car by replacing a missing unknown engine doesn't also mean 'restore' its 'presumed original' functionality? In other words ... are 'fixing' and 'restoring' mutually exclusive?

I think and accept that each one of us has a different 'flexibility of interpretation' for what 'guidelines' are concerned .... (otherwise we should also clear how exactly everyone understands the term 'guideline' as opposed to 'rule' ... )

But is it really necessary here? .... Why not simply enjoy these contests which should be fun for everybody ... where partecipants will do their best, compare notes with the others, and vote, rightly so, according to their taste anyway?

I, for one, vote for Dave's "DO keep the sand out of your shorts when you get there!" ...
Reply With Quote top
Reply

  RetouchPRO > Studio > Contests


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
July Contest Discussion T Paul Contests 42 08-05-2007 03:14 PM
Apr 06 Contest Discussion T Paul Contests 108 05-03-2006 04:05 AM
Mar 06 Contest Discussion T Paul Contests 63 04-04-2006 02:58 PM
Jan 06 Contest Discussion byRo Contests 62 02-02-2006 06:36 PM
March 05 Contest Entries T Paul Contests 47 06-30-2005 05:44 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2016 Doug Nelson. All Rights Reserved