| Notices | Welcome to RetouchPRO . You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload images and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us. | | Photo Restoration Repairing damaged photos | 
03-11-2005, 12:12 PM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5
| | | Photo Restoration I am attempting to restore a honeymoon photo of my parents. The photo was taken in 1964, and enlarged to a 8x10. I have the framed 8x10, and a 3x3 photo. The 3x3 still has the correct colors. I have flatbed scans of both photos.
Is there any process to apply the color scheme of the 3x3 photo to the 8x10? Apply Image won't work due to the difference in size.
Any help would be greatly appreciated! | 
03-11-2005, 01:52 PM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 2,709
| | Hi Sanderle, welcome to RP. Can you try posting your pictures, as it would help us to assess the problem and possibly come up with a solution. | 
03-11-2005, 02:24 PM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5
| | | Here are my photos:
good (3x3 print)
bad (8x10 print)
bad color matched ( color matched with good, neutralize)
Last edited by sanderle; 03-11-2005 at 04:12 PM.
| 
03-11-2005, 04:53 PM
|  | Member | | Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Canada
Posts: 92
| | | I think your 8x10 is pretty close, I would add a touch more green overall to get rid of the magenta cast.
The "good" 3x3 is really cyan, probably due to prolonged exposure to light. I would not think that is what it looked like when it was first printed.
But I have run into those customers at work who are so used to looking at a photo in its faded state , they do not think the corrected work "looks right"
All said and done I think your 8x10 is closest to the mark where the colour is concerned. | 
03-11-2005, 06:10 PM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 2,709
| | | Hi Sanderle, Since you are satisfied with the colours on the 3x3, I simply copied it and pasted it to a layer above the 10" picture. Then I used the Free transform tool to fit the image to the larger image. Finally set blend mode of transformed 3x3 layer to colour.
Now you have the detail of the larger image, and the colour of the 3x3.
The colour will not be quite as detailed, but the eye is more tuned to variations in brilliance than colour, so it should not be too noticeable.
I have not attempted any other corrections, you could possibly tweak curves a touch.
Last edited by Gary Richardson; 03-12-2005 at 01:55 AM.
Reason: modified description for clarity
| 
03-11-2005, 11:21 PM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5
| | | I can't see how the 8x10 is the correct color. That is the scan from a faded print. There is about a quarter of an inch all the way around the print that was covered with a mat. The colors in that area most closely match those of the 3.3 scan. | 
03-12-2005, 01:49 AM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 2,709
| | | I've added your original 8x10, and 3x3, to my earlier post, so you can see them side by side, and see that the corrected version does have the colour from your 3x3 version. If needed, you can do a hue/sat adj layer to further boost colour intensity.
I've modified the description on my earlier post, hope it clarifies what I did.
Last edited by Gary Richardson; 03-12-2005 at 01:56 AM.
| 
03-12-2005, 10:50 AM
|  | Senior Member Patron | | Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Seabrook Island, SC
Posts: 878
| | | Good by Gary I downloaded Gary's picture "good" and placed a levels adjustment layer on it. Using the option (alt) key to find the black point. That resulted in too much contrast so I reduced the opacity of that layer to 71%. Black Specks are noted but not corrected. | 
03-12-2005, 12:05 PM
|  | Moderator Patron | | Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Milan, Italy
Posts: 2,058
| | Hi sanderle,
Welcome to RP!
After trying different methods, I did exactly what Gary did: - Open your Good and Bad pictures.
- Dragged your smaller Good picture on top of the bigger Bad one and set the blending to 'Difference'. (It looks kind of weird ... nearly black whit lighter forms all over)
- Used the 'Free transform Tool' to modify the top Good Picture Layer until the image was practically only black ... (That's when top and underlying Layers are nearly perfectly aligned!!)
- I changed the top layer blending to Color
- Used USM to improve contrast and sharpness.
I'm posting the B&A of your BAD picture .... Gary,
Great Job!!!! | 
03-12-2005, 05:58 PM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 2,709
| | | Thanks Flora. Wish I'd thought of using Difference, it would of saved me some time with the transform stage. Will definitely not forget it in future. | 
03-12-2005, 07:37 PM
|  | Senior Member | | Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: northwest Indiana, about 45 minutes from Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,821
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by sanderle I can't see how the 8x10 is the correct color. That is the scan from a faded print. There is about a quarter of an inch all the way around the print that was covered with a mat. The colors in that area most closely match those of the 3.3 scan. | Welcome to RP. Like Juliana, I think the 8X10 looks best of the three, although not perfect by any means. Is it possible you had your scanner set to "restore color" when you scanned the pic? Is your monitor calibrated, or at least somewhat close?
Gary and Flora, as well as philbach did a nice job with the pic. But that's expected!! | 
03-13-2005, 09:57 PM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5
| | | Thanks for all of the ideas. I haven't had a chance yet to try them out.
FYI, my monitor and scanner are calibrated. My scans did not have any correction turned on. | 
03-14-2005, 11:03 AM
|  | Member | | Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Canada
Posts: 92
| | Hi ED!
Just force of habit to think in terms of correcting the colour to produce the best image possible......must be the lab technician brainwash...er I mean training
To me the 8x10 looks the closest to what the original probably looked like before it faded...I think I said that in a roundabout way | 
03-14-2005, 12:04 PM
|  | Member | | Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Canada
Posts: 92
| | Hi ED!
Just force of habit to think in terms of correcting the colour to produce the best image possible......must be the lab technician brainwash...er I mean training
To me the 8x10 looks the closest to what the original probably looked like before it faded...I think I said that in a roundabout way | 
03-14-2005, 12:22 PM
|  | Moderator Patron | | Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Milan, Italy
Posts: 2,058
| | Juliana, Ed,
I nearly fell for that 'trap' myself ....
Even though, in his post, Sanderle listed the pictures as follows: 1 good (3x3 print)
2 bad (8x10 print)
3 bad color matched ( color matched with good, neutralize) 8x10
The pictures uploaded in the wrong order .... so their physical order is: 1 bad (8x10 print) ... the faded one
2 good (3x3 print)
3 bad color matched ( color matched with good, neutralize) 8x10
Luckily Sanderle named his picture .... but once downloaded I still checked their size just to make sure.... |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:53 AM. | |
|