Photoshopper Needed - photo restoration

BigDragon

I have some scans of old photos that Id like to get touched up (some have old watermarks, some slightly damaged).

I want to get them to a slightly better quality so I can make prints for an album.

I am looking for advice about getting a freelancer or an online service to do this that wont cost an arm and a leg.

Id appreciate any advice as these are very sentimental.

Thanks

5uspect

There are a few here that might be interested in doing that for you. Also ask in Digital art and design maybe. I'd nearly do it but I'm pretty busy at the moment with my thesis.

How many photos are there anyway?

Edit: Here's a thread of what can be achieved.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055154227

BigDragon

5uspect wrote: »

There are a few here that might be interested in doing that for you. Also ask in Digital art and design maybe. I'd nearly do it but I'm pretty busy at the moment with my thesis.

How many photos are there anyway?

Edit: Here's a thread of what can be achieved.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055154227

Thanks 5uspect

Ive got about 25 that have a watermark from the original photographer (circa 72) cause lost all the original photos. Some of these have damage due to creasing. If I could just get the watermark (text) off the photos scans Id be happy.

Cheers

BigDragon

I just want to point out that Im not trying to get around copyright or anything. The watermark was an ink stamp from a photographer that doesnt exist anymore and the originals were lost in a fire....they are photos from my Mums wedding day in 1972.

Thanks

Sebzy

How about giving us a look at one of these images and we'll see what we can do.

Kinklee

Why don't you learn how to do it yourself. You have 25 images, so by the end of it all you should be an expert. All the software like Gimp® is free and there a bundle of tutorials available. All you are talking about is a bit of cloning or image replacement. Use google to get the links. Maybe then you can do some work on the cheap at a later stage for someone else or even show them how to do it.

regards

Kinklee

Knowledge is power.

pixbyjohn

BigDragon wrote: »

I have some scans of old photos that Id like to get touched up (some have old watermarks, some slightly damaged).

I want to get them to a slightly better quality so I can make prints for an album.

I am looking for advice about getting a freelancer or an online service to do this that wont cost an arm and a leg.

Id appreciate any advice as these are very sentimental.

Thanks

Now is the time for you to join a Photoshop night class and during the course you will be allowed retouch your scanned photos and also enjoy all the other fabulous features of Photoshop.
Look in your local night class college for further info. Good luck

6th

Learning to do it yourself is the best option as long as you are in no rush. I'm pretty much self taught and its something I love doing now. Below is one of the ones I am most proud of and didnt take too long.

Just scan in the pics and put the originals away safely ..... then you can do whatever you want with the scans.

6th wrote: »

Its something I've done a fair bit of and its very satisfying work:





Thats one I did a couple of weeks ago.

5uspect

Very nice work 6th.

6th

Cheers 5us.

I find the only problem when asked to do work like this is when they want a 6x4 blow up to A4 and expect amazing results.

5uspect

Photoshop is great but it can't work miracles...yet...

floydmoon1

very nice job 6th.just wondering how you filled in the missing top right corner.

Lady Lainy

6th, thats amazing work. and i can understand how its rewarding. bringing a piece of history back.

I'm currently doing a night course in photoshop cos i did journalism in college and photoshop is pretty much a must with journalism today as 35mm photography being phased out, journalists are expected to be able to take pics.

and yeah...how did u do that corner? that must have taken ages to get it just right and blended in.... which version of photoshop u using?

rymus

bloody hell 6th.. only spotted that now. That's brilliant.

Fajitas!

Jesus, that is fantastic 6th!

Very impressed!

ThOnda

Oh my...!!!

6th

Thanks guys.

As I said I've been in front of photoshop for about 10 years (think it was PS 3.01 on 3 floppy disks). Knowing Ps isn't enough though, if it doesn't sound to ponsy you really have to sympathise with the photgraph. I studies fine art in college so I think the artistic side helped me with "creating" the missing section of the pic.

That photo was only a 6x4 so it took about 2 hours solid work.

Kinklee

The retouching in this image is amaturish at best. There are so many obvious mistakes but what the hey, joe street never seems to mind.

Placebo

Kinklee wrote: »

The retouching in this image is amaturish at best. There are so many obvious mistakes but what the hey, joe street never seems to mind.

??

sheesh

It was done for free ffs put up a better one or shutup :mad:

Roen

And you can tell all that from tiny, saved for web images? Fair play!

Personally I think it's fantastic. The only reason I'm glad you posted is I had missed the original thread.
If you have any actual valid input as to how to correct these 'obvious mistakes' then by all means enlighten us.

FearDark

Kinklee wrote: »

The retouching in this image is amaturish at best. There are so many obvious mistakes but what the hey, joe street never seems to mind.

Im interested to see your work, from the size of the uploaded images I honestly cant see anything major, I think 6th has done a fantastic job.

Come on then...

5uspect

There are a few duplicaed clone brush marks but its a pretty excellent job.

Put up or shut up ftw! :pac:

Fajitas!

Kinklee wrote: »

The retouching in this image is amaturish at best. There are so many obvious mistakes but what the hey, joe street never seems to mind.

Ha.

Come on then... Show us what you can do.

melekalikimaka

Kinklee wrote: »

The retouching in this image is amaturish at best. There are so many obvious mistakes but what the hey, joe street never seems to mind.

[waves fist in anger and 6th dissing] yeah what they said (points up) [/waves fist in anger and 6th dissing]

6th

There are some areas that would need to be looked at if it was a paying job but maybe you can give me some pointers? I could help you with the art tuition you're looking for in exchange seeing as I have a degree in fine art?

deaddonkey

Kinklee wrote: »

The retouching in this image is amaturish at best. There are so many obvious mistakes but what the hey, joe street never seems to mind.

Your spelling is pretty amateurish. Put up or shut up.

Placebo

i think most i ever needed to do was :

Calina

Kinklee wrote: »

The retouching in this image is amaturish at best. There are so many obvious mistakes but what the hey, joe street never seems to mind.

I find that if you have comments to make about someone's work, if you want to be taken seriously, you need to make those comments constructively. You have utterly failed to provide any support for your view there and your tone is highly patronising. It is disappointing to say the least.

6th has done an excellent job on the rebuilt. There are a couple of details which you could identify as needing a little more attention, but overall, my view is that it is excellent at best, rather than amateurish. Given that you state there are many obvious mistakes, it would be worth your while spelling them out so that people can learn from the experience. In some respects, that is the object of the exercise. I'm not here to say "show us what you can do" - other people have done so. I am here only to say that if you make a remark like the above, it is highly amateurish of you not to back it up with some sort of supporting argument.

For the most part, the reconstruction across the print damage is excellent,. There are some details around the reconstruction of the lady's left arm that look a little overly straight, the contrast in the beach is better in the original than in the retouched version, and the blacks are a little grey. However, in the grand scheme of things, there is no argument for suggesting that it's an amateurish reconstruction. Reconstruction on top RHC is very good.

bernard0368

Hell I know I wish had a fraction of 6th's talant with photoshop.