Kodacolor gone Made
1.) I opened the file and applied a levels adjustment layer using the white eyedropper on the right shirt color of the man and the black dropper on his belt.
2.) On top of that I used an adjustment layer channel mixer with grey as the output and the source the red channel.
3.)I then combined the layers (stamped them) and continued. I selected the oval center area, Inverted that selection, Feathered the selection, and copied the outer edges of the photo and used screen blending mode. I did that times two to match the luminosity of the inner with the outer part of the photo
4.)I combined the layers again (stamped them) and continued.
5.) I copied that layer and ran neat image on it which cleaned it up considerably.
6.) I copied that layer using overlay blending mode to increase the contrast
7.) To increase contrast and darken the upper right part of the photo I used a levels adjustment layer with a gradient in the mask box. Times 2
I took a different approach which was to squeeze out of the image all of the contrast that was left to bring back some detail. A curve to adjust the contrast further. From here you can convert to B&W prior to cleaning it up or you can try to color it.
welcome to RP.
you asked about getting the color back. i'm afraid it's a bit too far gone to just restore. there is some color data left, but i'd use that later on to proof out the colors for a colorization AFTER restoring what's been lost here....and there's a lot gone.
your first task is to find the detail again, as best you can. the second task to reconstruct the missing detail...again, as best you can. once you have a decent image again, THEN AND ONLY THEN would i attempt to re-color the image. some, in other images like yours, have done a semi-passable job of restoring color as the restoration, but it was rather hit and miss and not what i would call a client-worthy job. it could possibly be done that way, but i think in the long run you're going spend as much time or more trying to do it that way than to just restore and then colorize.
so, finding the detail. the first step is to desaturate the image. dont go to grayscale, but do go to no color by desaturating. this can be done with things like the Fast Fix plugin, or with a hue/sat/lightness filter and simply reducing the saturation to 0. that will give a decent base image to work with.
curves, contrast/brightness, levels, lum frequencies, 32 band gray, clarify, high pass sharpen, and noise reducers are going to be your next steps. these are almost all tools that will tend to bring out detail by using contrasting methods. in other words, you're going to sharpen by contrast. you can also use blending modes with layers. you do one tool, make a duplicate and test some blend modes between those layers. this will often give you a bit more detail as well.
basically, all you want to do is find the image first. that's all. it's blended into all that discoloration and fading. you have to bring it back.
once you get the best you can with those type methods, it's now a matter of reconstructing what's just totally lost and cant be brought back any other way. first, find what's there. second, add back what shld be there and isnt.
and this is going to be the tricky part. some folks start here and it's almost always a mistake. you're going to use tools like clone, and push, and smudge and airbrush. you're going to borrow parts of the image to reconstruct other parts. or, you're going to simply create those missing parts newly.
the best way to do this is to make a new blank raster layer. you'll do all of your work on this or on successive blank layers adding one to the other. you set your tools to 'use all layers'. and you also leave good restored layer(s) turned on so that you can 'use all layers'. but, you're going to putting all the cloning, pushing, smudging and so on, ONTO the blank layer, not your restored layers. with the blank layer on top of the restored layers, the changes will be on top and appear to be on your good layers. so, you'll see your progress as you work as if it were being done on the good layers.
you simply work with these type tools to reconstruct what shld be there. there is enough detail in your image that you're going to be able to do this fairly well. you can see his lips, for instance, even if it is somewhat cluttered up. so, you remove the clutter and bring out the lips a bit more.
this may not always be truly reconstruction. some of it is still restoring, things like the lighen/darken tool are normally restorations since they are non-destructive. clone is often thought of as restoring as well, but because it is destructive, i tend to class it more as a reconstruction tool.
you may also find that it helps to do a bit of cloning and smudging in stage one, especially if it's easy spot removal type things. that's fine. whatever works. but i'd save the major work for stage two with those tools.
once you've done all the stage one stuff and the stage two stuff and you're satisfied you have a good, clean image again, THEN move on to your re-coloring. dont try to color this image before that or you wont like it. you'll be adding complexity you dont need if you do so.
i'm attaching an image that i took through stage one and partially through stage two. i could put hours and hours in on this type of image and i just dont have the time to do everyone's. besides, i'd be spoiling your fun i mostly concentrated on the faces. in fact, while i was working in the early stages, i made the determination of 'what's important here?'. what is the real picture here? well, obviously it's the man and the girl, but even more, it's their faces. so, when doing all the previous work, i check the faces. did this action make them better or worse?
i also concentrated more on his face than hers. hers is going to be the more difficult. being the smaller object there is less detail left. and i tend to work from easy to difficult.
also, for those who are throwing away the blue channel, i'd highly recommend not doing so. there is some detail there and you're throwing it away. a brightness/contrast adjustment layer applied to just that channel will bring back a surprising amount. you could probably also use a curves or levels on it. in fact, i found that by splitting the channels and applying a brightness/contrast adjustment layer on each channel and then combining them back made for a pretty good starting point.
Phil what is stamping & neat?
I don't believe I've ever used "stamping" layers before. I have an older version of Photoshop. What would the equivalent be?
Also, I have not used neat nor can find it on my photoshop.
I have 7 - what would the equivalent of these two items
So far I'm not getting the same results - but I have a feeling not having the neat is a big part of it?
Last edited by sobo; 05-11-2006 at 05:43 PM. Reason: change text
Nice one Murry--I think you got the perfect medium between keeping noise reasonable while still making it look vivid.
Phil, yours looks smeared like maybe you turned up Neat Image too strong?
Sobo, here is some additional detail on my edit. By the way, you can get even better results with a good quality scan (higher resolution and with the highest density you can without any scanner biasing.
The image is very weak with all of the detail in a very narrow range. So the approach here was as follows:
- Duplicate the background layer.
- On the duplicate layer perform the following levels adjustment. Bring up the Levels command(Ctrl L). Select each channel R, G, & B individually and drag both the Highlight and Shadow sliders into toward respective edges of the Histogram, thereby boosting the contrast. Don't worry about how ugly the color looks. Do this for all 3 channels. When you are done, change the Blend mode of that layer from Normal to Luminosity. You can flatten the image and apply an adjustment curve to boost the contrast in the faces. You can touch up from there. It may look better to you in grayscale but I like the sepia color.
I quickly touched up a few of the black spots.
Take a shot at it
I don't know if I'm adding much except a different way of getting results similar to previous posts.
If you look at the histogram of photos like this you'll see the distribution is very narrow (meaning everything is compressed into a tight color range). So just open a levels adjustment layer and adjust the input sliders until for each channel until you've expanded each histogram to fill the full color range--in this case, you can even blow the shadows a bit. That's the generic fade removal technique.
In this particular case, the blue channel is pretty crummy-looking, so I know I'll toss that out eventually, so I only bothered doing the sliders for red and green. Additionally, I selected just their faces and bodies so I would adjust the histogram for only those without regard to the border. After you do this, you can see your unfaded image, but it has weird coloring because I ignored the blue channel--that gets fixed next.
So now create a channel mixer and load the "greyscale standard" which gives you luminance. Now since the blue channel is garbage, just set that coefficient to 0% then add what you took from blue into green. So the final coefficients for R,G,B are 32,68,0. I use a channel mixer in lieu of working in the channel palette because it's non-destructive. You're 80% done at this point--all further steps are relatively minor adjustments.
Then I did an unsharp mask at settings 25/35 (tweaks local contrast up a bit), and smart sharpen at settings 50 strength, 2.5 radius. Then I create a color balance layer to give the image the duotone of sepia in the shadows and blue in the highlights (this is totally to my personal taste--you could colorize or leave it greyscale too.)
Then I did Neat Image (turned way down in strength) followed by the dust and scratch remover and a tiny bit of cloning and healing.
ok, like i said, i could spend a LOT of hours on this. and this version is certainly not done, but thought i'd do a bit more from the earlier version. this is a lot more fine work, mostly push and clone with a bit of airbrushing... all done on a separate layer. i've got so many layers now i'll probably just copy merge pretty soon and start a new image from that. this stuff eats memory like crazy.
i decided there really wasnt much to save in the background, so i'm ignoring that for now and dont mind removing parts to save the heads and other areas. the stuff around the man's head was so close in nature to his hair that i had a bit of trouble distinguishing the two, but i think i got it right.
and again, this is mostly fixes on the man. i did a little more on the girl but that's going to take some really fine work to get her right. his eyes and her eyes in particular are going to be difficult. his right arm still isnt right either. i worked it a bit, but it still needs more.
for cleaning up his pants and shirt and her dress, i made separate selections of those areas and treated each with my 32 band gray plugin. this allows you to adjust the grays up and down in bands. very handy for images like this. rather than try to clone out the smudges and dirty look, i simply selected those areas and adjusted the tones i wanted to change, blending them into the other tones that were there.
i long ago realized that cloning on a face is very difficult, even with a tiny clone brush and low opacities and density. what i do now is mostly push and airbrush. i use the push tool to move one shade over to another in very small strokes with a very small brush size, often 1 or 2 pixels in size. and i use the airbrush to do shadows and shading with a dabbing type stroke at a low or medium density. if you try to paint in long strokes with the airbrush you'll get a nice smudged look, which we dont want here. so, this is used to shadow and add noise and texture.
it's still not done by a long shot, but you can maybe see better where i'm going now.
Equivalent to Neat Image in Photoshop 7
I'm using Photoshop 7 and I do not believe it has Neat Image or Stamping. Can someone tell me what the comparable features would be?
Well, I've gotten lots of advice so I'll go ahead and try some of the tips. I would really like to know about the Neat Image and Stamping though.
thanx for all your time everyone
|Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)|
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|A Kid Picture Restored From 1950's||SteveB2005||Photo Restoration||4||09-29-2005 11:07 AM|
|1950's Photo||kbeatrice||Photo Restoration||12||06-18-2004 08:48 AM|
|sepia drives me mad||Juliana Ross||Photo Restoration||3||03-18-2004 03:04 PM|
|Mad Kid||themanda||Photo-Based Art||16||06-15-2003 08:43 AM|