Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Restoration vs Re-Interpretation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Restoration vs Re-Interpretation

    Restoration vs Re-Interpretation

    Does anyone here see a different between the two?

    When a photo is damaged, is there two different classes of repair and savior for the photo?

    For instance.....

    If you're repairing cracks and holes in a photo to make it look like it would have originally, we know that's a restoration.

    But, if you're recreating the photo based on what it looked like, but not repairing the source data, but instead creating your own perception of what it may have looked like, is that more of a re-interpretation than a restoration?

    There are a lot of very skilled restoration artists here, and I'm pretty amazing at what people can do sometimes, but if the results of the work look nothing like the original may have, except in context only, is it a restoration, or is it a re-interpretation?

    I'm just curious, what people think of the difference between a restoration and an artistic rendition of a restoration, and I thought it would be an interesting topic!

  • #2
    Re: Restoration vs Re-Interpretation

    The context and the client's choice are the 2 factors which will guide you. Of course this apply for the extreme damaged pics which had lost any hope to restore some of the original areas. I'm dealing every day with very damaged images because this is my speciality and people send to me real bad files. The first and more important step is consult the owner and ask for his/her preferences. Mainly the worst part of the job is the background and clothes restoration. Face must be restored as original but if you deal with a very charged background, with many details and very bad state you'll need too much time, maybe days to redo this. I'm rejecting this kind of jobs unless we could agree about the background replacement. It's not the best but I can't stay 2 days to resore background's people, clothes, trees and flowers, buildings, which demand x4 than the main person (face, body, clothes) retouch. The plugings are useless over the small details restore too, you have to use some other tool and restore manually every small detail. Sometimes I cut some parts of the image if the client agrees, specially when the pic lost very difficult parts to restore as hands and has no chance to do a decent restore. I don't like tu copy and paste other's pictures parts over the current work. So, the ideal situation is to work and restore the image as-is but sometimes you'll must take another way, maybe. However, no change should be done without the client's approval.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Restoration vs Re-Interpretation

      Yes, I don't do a lot of restorations, but occasionally, I get ones where pieces of the photo just can't be repaired and need to be replaced.

      It's not often I find people who care though-- generally, they say, "If I can see the face (or the person), the rest doesn't matter."

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Restoration vs Re-Interpretation

        Yes, that's right. Face is capturing the 90% of the cilent's choice. Try to improve the eyes restoration, as we talked before. The eyes are the key, they express the subect's personality. Have pacience and also observe some eyes drawings, its parts and always try to imagine in the current work every anatomic detail superposed over the layer/background. You must paint first with your view, your imagination and the hand will follow you easely.

        Comment

        Related Topics

        Collapse

        Working...
        X