A real challenge-yellowed tape over half of face

[TwinbNJ]

Diane - I have been watching your progression here and just wanted to comment on the difference from your first submission to this one here. Roger does wonderful work and I have been keeping track of the tips he has given you - learned a lot on this thread. Great job and it's good to see you did not give up!

[dipech]

Looks like the picture posted too small, so I resized it and am reposting.

Diane

[Jim Conway]

Could I ask why you didn't remove the tape?

[dipech]

Hi Jim,

The original is very old and fragile. It seemed unthinkable to try to remove the tape which had been on there a very long time. You could easily end up totally destroying the original--a risk I did not even consider taking.

All the best,
Diane

[Jim Conway]

Just a suggestion Diane, but you might want to look into the History, Conservation and Repair section of the forum here - then go to an antique store or garage sale and gather up the biggest mess of ruined old photos you can find.

The idea is raising your comfort level in handling distressed old photos of course - and believe me, taking off that tape is not anywhere near as difficult as the steps you have to take if you don't. More inportant to your clients, it gives you a shot at a much more professional final result.

I'm with you on "unthinkable" until you've done it a least a few dozen times though! Practicing on the ones that have already been tossed is the only way to go!

Jim Conway,
Timemark Photo Conservators

[dipech]

Jim,

How interesting! Other than pulling, is there anything that helps the tape to come off easier? Putting it near a little steam??

But actually, at least on this picture, it isn't so terribly hard to work with the tape still on, once you get the hang of these techniques--and know which one's to use when. But the tape-pull method could certainly save you some time.

Diane

[Jim Conway]

http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/sho...4737#post54737

I've never had much luck with links here but you might try this one. In it we discuss the use of the tools needed.

Tape is a common problem and although I can't see this particular original to be sure, I can tell you that the job of removing the tape on similar works would be less than a ten minute job.

Face detail is tough to rebuild and a layer of plastic over the features is going to severely complicate the work leading to "opinion" on the look rather than an unmistakable recreation of the original.

"Pulling" is not the answer and that can risk further damage, it's heat (a hot knife tool) or solvents designed for the purpose that will do the trick.

Jim Conway

[dipech]

Re: the hair dryer tip combined with dental floss, micro-spatulas, wrapping an album and sticking it in the freezer...

Jim, thanks very much for your post and this very informative and amusing link. I'm sure that one day soon it will come in extremely handy. About how much are the knife tools that you mentioned with the hot tip??

Diane

[roger_ele]

Diane,

You are getting it - very good!

Jim is right about the shape of the face being subjective.

These are the areas that I see that I think could use attention,

-Detail in the face, try useing a higher opacity and a smaller brush to work that little spot next to the bigger spot, and again until the bigger spot is gone. Or to say it another way, look for the little spot that you can feel confidence in what it should look like, then the next little spot, etc. The hand on this is hard! I ended up guessing and reconstructing with just enough shape that hopelfully the viewer would assume the rest.

-Lighting on the boy's face is too dark in front, and too light on his temple. Looking at the lighting on the horses face the light is coming from over the photographers shoulder from the left, it is a soft source of light which means that the shadows have a gradual edge to them. The front of the horses face is well lit so the front of the child would be well lit also, with just a little shadow, on the shadow side only of the nose and under to the shadow side of the lower lip and a very thin shadow along the outside edge of the cheek. The left edge of the face (the highlight side) would be slightly lighter than the front of the face because of the added light that hits it from behind the child.

I don't know whether mine had the same problem, but now that I look at it the front of the horses legs don't look real...

Attached is a quick example of the face adjusted on the last retouch of yours. Please don't take this as being critical, you are doing great! I just want to take you as far as I can, then maybe someone else will take us both further ...

Roger

[Sanda]

I've played around with this one a bit. First I converted it to B&W. I decided rather than trying to remove the effects of the tape I would belnd it in. I mainly used the healing brush to disguise the tape. In some areas I needed to dodge and burn to correct problems. I cloned slightly on the dress and a little around the left eye. I adjusted the levels and curves then gave it a sepia tone. If I had spent a bit more time I'm sure there could be more improvement in the face. I am not happy with the outline of the face but that too could be improved with some work.
I didn't do enough with the hand but with some cloning it could be improved.

[dipech]

Hi Roger,

Thanks again for your great feedback! Boy this stuff does get complicated! How do we tell where the source of light is coming from and the kind of light it is?? I thought it was just general sunlight or maybe overcast in this picture. I'll have to study up on this area too... Any books in particular that you'd recommend?

I'd like to take a good look at the adjusted face you posted but at 72 dpi it didn't come out very clearly at all. I'd really appreciate it if you could repost just your picture at a higher resolution.

Diane

[roger_ele]

Hi Diane,

Light source and direction comes from experience being a photographer, I could talk / write for days on this, it is one of the things I love about photography. I am not sure how much is appropriate with-in this thread, but I am as game as you are...

Imagine if you were a small insect like a fly, and you could rest on each spot in the photo and look out from the subject at the light source, it is the light that each spot sees that creates the look of the lighting that we see when we look at anything and / or at a photograph. What I mean is that you can practice this in real life without ever taking a photograph, by studing what is lighter and darker, and asking yourself why.

Find yourself a tree, a piece of sidewalk next to it with sunlight hitting the sidewalk, look at the trunk of the tree. There will be a glow from the reflection of the sunlight off of the pavement. The wider the anngle of the light source (bigger and closer it is to the tree) the more light cast from one spot will be filled be another spot, giving the light a softer look. walk around to the side of the tree so that you see glow on one side and shadow on the other. The spot in between the light and dark side of the tree will have a harder edge to the shadow because that spot sees a narrow slice of light from the pavement. If there are no leaves on the tree the glow will not seem as bright or directional because it will be partly masked by the light comming from above.

Snag two pieces of cardboard and a person, walk outside in the shade. Hold one piece of cardboard vertically on one side of the persons face, hold the other horizontally on top of the head so that the face is shaded and watch how the light changes. If you don't see much difference your eyes are probably adjusting for the surrounding brightness level, make a tunnel out of your hand and look through that. Now look at the person moving yourself around the person, ask them to hold the cardboard. What I am demonstrating is lighting is a combination of where light is coming from and what is subtracting light from hitting the subject.

Look at the horses head, see the planes of the front of the head and the side and which is lit how much, and how the transistion is gradual (each hair does not create a distinct shadow), it is also not a lot darker under the head (the chin, etc.) so the light is comming more from the front than alot above and it is not dirrect sunlight.

The net result without getting too confusing is that I think the most main light source is the sky, with some sort of tree cover overhead blocking the light from the sky that would have been comming from above.

To answer your question, I don't know of any books on this except for "Matters of Light and Depth" by Ross Lowell. He is a master of lighting from the film industry.

In regards to the work done on the face, I did not shrink it, I just cropped the one you posted. Here is it blurry - but res'd up. If you want to post a larger version I could do that also.

Sorry this post is soooo long, hope it helps,

Roger

[GOLDCOIN]

Roger_ele...
Learned so much, thanks for all of your typing!!

Here's that young cowboy....in a borrowed hat...

[dipech]

Hi Roger,

Have been meaning to thank you again for taking the time to explain about lighting! Haven't had a chance to go out and do alot of yet practicing with my camera but hope to do so very soon. Do you prefer digital or film cameras? Which would you recommend for beginners?

Let's say you are trying to take a picture of a 11x17 picture or painting to use for restoring the picture. Is there a way to avoid getting major glare coming from the camera? If you shoot without the flash will you get all the detail you need? I had to do this recently with a film camera and no matter whether I took the pictures indoors or out, or how well it all seemed to look in the viewfinder, I had major glare ruining all the shots. Each shot had the glare in a different spot and I tried to use the best parts of each picture for my restoration, but of course this is not the way to do it.

Thought I'd post one of the pics to give you a better idea what I'm talking about:

Hope you're having a wonderful 4th of July weekend!
Diane

[roger_ele]

Hi Diane

Thanks, my pleasure.

Film or digital? Both are great, but for someone learning digital is wonderful because of the instant feedback - it really speeds up the learning process.

Regarding copying old photos; The reason you are getting a reflection is that our light source is too high, it needs to come in at a lower angle. Let me start by saying a couple of easy ways to do this that will work with the minimum of equipment;

Open your garage door, set the photo on the floor of the garage, with all lights off and just the reflected light coming into the garage take your pictures of the photo. Make sure to do this at a distance into the garage at least the distance the garage door is wide. Use a tripod if your test photos come out blurry. I could talk about exposure, but first thing is to get lighting that will work, so just bracket your exposures...

or you could do this...
1) Snag a kitchen table or a sturdy desk or card table, move it up against a wall that is at right angles to a wall with a window, we will use the table as a horizonatl copy stand so that we don't have to worry about having a tripod.
2) Lean the photo up against the wall as vertical as possible, or pin it, or use removeable tape on the back, or little kitchen magnets on a steel plate to hold the photo in place, whatever would be appropriate...
3) Let the camera on phone books / books that raise the camera lens to the middle of the photo
4) Make sure the camera is at right angles to the wall and the photo
5) turn off the room lights so you just using window light, take your photos of the photo
Note: The copy camera set up needs to be far enough away from the window (which is your light source) that the edge that is nearest the window doesn't see a feflection and that the light fall off is negligable from the edge of the photo that is near the light to the far edge.

Although it is possible, I suggest you don't use flash for this.

To understand how great of an angle the light source needs to be, take a bright flashlight and put is next to the camera, notice the reflection, now increase the angle until the reflection disappears. A laquered painting will need a greater angle because of the shiney bumps that are at an angle to the camera axis.

Holler if any of this doesn't make sense, Roger