Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > WIll CS3 help with this difficult touch up?

Reply
Thread Tools

WIll CS3 help with this difficult touch up?

 
 
RBrickston
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-13-2007
I'm using PS 7, mostly the healing brush, but this old snapshot is getting
really difficult in some areas, particularly the horizontal cracking
across the hood, the variation of shadows on either side of the crack is
not allowing me to get a good cloning area.

Here is the original unmodified scan:

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle1.jpg

The original was a consumer 3.5" x 3.5" photo which I scanned at 2000 dpi.
Before I started with the Healing Brush, I did a color balance and levels
only.

Here's where I'm at so far:

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle2.jpg

Would CS3 help here or perhaps some other program?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
harned@osuokc.edu
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-13-2007
On Sep 13, 12:40 pm, RBrickston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I'm using PS 7, mostly the healing brush, but this old snapshot is getting
> really difficult in some areas, particularly the horizontal cracking
> across the hood, the variation of shadows on either side of the crack is
> not allowing me to get a good cloning area.
>
> Here is the original unmodified scan:
>
> http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle1.jpg
>
> The original was a consumer 3.5" x 3.5" photo which I scanned at 2000 dpi.
> Before I started with the Healing Brush, I did a color balance and levels
> only.
>
> Here's where I'm at so far:
>
> http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle2.jpg
>
> Would CS3 help here or perhaps some other program?


I have seen trouble spots like this before. It can be tedious and I
do not think CS3 will be much easier. What I recommend is to zoom in
on the damage to the pixel level and work the clone stamp with a 1
pixel brush. This allows you to choose pixels somewhat randomly and
in very close proximity with the crack area. As you get that level of
detail under control you can expand it a bit. It will take time but
the technique works. Photoshop is wonderful but it is not perfect.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Dave Cohen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-13-2007
RBrickston wrote:
> I'm using PS 7, mostly the healing brush, but this old snapshot is getting
> really difficult in some areas, particularly the horizontal cracking
> across the hood, the variation of shadows on either side of the crack is
> not allowing me to get a good cloning area.
>
> Here is the original unmodified scan:
>
> http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle1.jpg
>
> The original was a consumer 3.5" x 3.5" photo which I scanned at 2000 dpi.
> Before I started with the Healing Brush, I did a color balance and levels
> only.
>
> Here's where I'm at so far:
>
> http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle2.jpg
>
> Would CS3 help here or perhaps some other program?
>


I think what you have as well as many other packages have the capability
to fix this. They all have the tools you would use.
This type of thing tests the skill and patience of the operator and some
people will do a better job in a shorter time than others. Personally, I
would work using a duplicate layer and maybe not try to fix everything
in one step.
Dave Cohen
 
Reply With Quote
 
TRoss
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-13-2007
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:40:15 GMT, RBrickston <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>I'm using PS 7, mostly the healing brush, but this old snapshot is getting
>really difficult in some areas, particularly the horizontal cracking
>across the hood, the variation of shadows on either side of the crack is
>not allowing me to get a good cloning area.
>
>Here is the original unmodified scan:
>
>http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle1.jpg
>
>The original was a consumer 3.5" x 3.5" photo which I scanned at 2000 dpi.
>Before I started with the Healing Brush, I did a color balance and levels
>only.
>
>Here's where I'm at so far:
>
>http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle2.jpg
>
>Would CS3 help here or perhaps some other program?


Unless you're looking for an excuse to upgrade, PS7 has all the tools
you need for a job like this. I've repaired a lot worse than this with
PS7.

The work is tedious. It's like killing ants ... one at a time.

I would use the Clone Stamp for this. The Healing Brush is okay, but I
find the "healing" tends to spread, making everything look blurry.

The other reason I prefer the Clone Stamp for repairing cracks and
creases is you can repair to an empty layer. Create a new layer,
select the Clone Stamp too, and check the Sample All Layers option
from the Clone Stamp options bar. Cloning to an empty layer has a lot
of advantages.

Clone Stamp also lets you adjust the opacity. Sometimes I find it's
easier to get a good match by reducing the opacity to 30% and build up
the repair.


TR
 
Reply With Quote
 
EdiTOR
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-13-2007
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:40:15 GMT, RBrickston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I'm using PS 7, mostly the healing brush, but this old snapshot is getting
>really difficult in some areas, particularly the horizontal cracking
>across the hood, the variation of shadows on either side of the crack is
>not allowing me to get a good cloning area.
>
>Here is the original unmodified scan:
>
>http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle1.jpg
>
>The original was a consumer 3.5" x 3.5" photo which I scanned at 2000 dpi.
>Before I started with the Healing Brush, I did a color balance and levels
>only.
>
>Here's where I'm at so far:
>
>http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle2.jpg
>
>Would CS3 help here or perhaps some other program?


4 to 5 minutes of fooling around with the original in Photoline-32. The front
fender and a quite a few other line details overall could be done much better
but that might take another 2 to 3 minutes. I only spend appreciable time on
restoration when pay is involved. The front fender problem caused by my
overzealous use of the Light/Shadow tool to try to reclaim some non-existent
details in the blacks and it only compounded some editing problems. Should have
saved that step for last or kept a lightened copy open alongside for reference
but I wanted to see what was there before starting.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1271/...54185859_o.jpg

Those blues a little oversaturated too. Easy to pull those back using
Photoline's, much better than PhotoShop's, hue/saturation tool, while enhancing
that red car a bit.
 
Reply With Quote
 
EdiTOR
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-13-2007
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:50:22 GMT, EdiTOR <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:40:15 GMT, RBrickston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>I'm using PS 7, mostly the healing brush, but this old snapshot is getting
>>really difficult in some areas, particularly the horizontal cracking
>>across the hood, the variation of shadows on either side of the crack is
>>not allowing me to get a good cloning area.
>>
>>Here is the original unmodified scan:
>>
>>http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle1.jpg
>>
>>The original was a consumer 3.5" x 3.5" photo which I scanned at 2000 dpi.
>>Before I started with the Healing Brush, I did a color balance and levels
>>only.
>>
>>Here's where I'm at so far:
>>
>>http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle2.jpg
>>
>>Would CS3 help here or perhaps some other program?

>
>4 to 5 minutes of fooling around with the original in Photoline-32. The front
>fender and a quite a few other line details overall could be done much better
>but that might take another 2 to 3 minutes. I only spend appreciable time on
>restoration when pay is involved. The front fender problem caused by my
>overzealous use of the Light/Shadow tool to try to reclaim some non-existent
>details in the blacks and it only compounded some editing problems. Should have
>saved that step for last or kept a lightened copy open alongside for reference
>but I wanted to see what was there before starting.
>
>http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1271/...54185859_o.jpg
>
>Those blues a little oversaturated too. Easy to pull those back using
>Photoline's, much better than PhotoShop's, hue/saturation tool, while enhancing
>that red car a bit.


I forgot to mention, the reason that I much prefer Photoline-32 for restoration
editing, or editing of any nature, is that its clone and healing brushes (and
others) have a preview mode built right into the brushes. It shows you exactly
what is being stamped down before you put it there. It makes it fast and simple
to put the detail back exactly where you want it to be and with what level of
transparency and softness. It's akin to the advantages of having a live-preview
in digital cameras during all editing phases.

Not to mention all the other reasons people have given, full 32-bit math being
used at all times, it's not dependent on that details-smearing bicubic which is
Photoshop's only resampling option ... the list of advantages over Photoshop is
extensive.

 
Reply With Quote
 
RBrickston
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2007
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
> On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:40:15 GMT, RBrickston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >I'm using PS 7, mostly the healing brush, but this old snapshot is getting
> >really difficult in some areas, particularly the horizontal cracking
> >across the hood, the variation of shadows on either side of the crack is
> >not allowing me to get a good cloning area.
> >
> >Here is the original unmodified scan:
> >
> >http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle1.jpg
> >
> >The original was a consumer 3.5" x 3.5" photo which I scanned at 2000 dpi.
> >Before I started with the Healing Brush, I did a color balance and levels
> >only.
> >
> >Here's where I'm at so far:
> >
> >http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle2.jpg
> >
> >Would CS3 help here or perhaps some other program?

>
> 4 to 5 minutes of fooling around with the original in Photoline-32. The front
> fender and a quite a few other line details overall could be done much better
> but that might take another 2 to 3 minutes. I only spend appreciable time on
> restoration when pay is involved. The front fender problem caused by my
> overzealous use of the Light/Shadow tool to try to reclaim some non-existent
> details in the blacks and it only compounded some editing problems. Should have
> saved that step for last or kept a lightened copy open alongside for reference
> but I wanted to see what was there before starting.
>
> http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1271/...54185859_o.jpg
>
> Those blues a little oversaturated too. Easy to pull those back using
> Photoline's, much better than PhotoShop's, hue/saturation tool, while enhancing
> that red car a bit.
>


Holy ****, very nice work. Looks like you also ran some kind of sharpening
on it also. What would the learning curve be for Photoline?
 
Reply With Quote
 
D_Mac
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2007
On Sep 14, 12:02 pm, RBrickston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:40:15 GMT, RBrickston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> > >I'm using PS 7, mostly the healing brush, but this old snapshot is getting
> > >really difficult in some areas, particularly the horizontal cracking
> > >across the hood, the variation of shadows on either side of the crack is
> > >not allowing me to get a good cloning area.

>
> > >Here is the original unmodified scan:

>
> > >http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle1.jpg

>
> > >The original was a consumer 3.5" x 3.5" photo which I scanned at 2000 dpi.
> > >Before I started with the Healing Brush, I did a color balance and levels
> > >only.

>
> > >Here's where I'm at so far:

>
> > >http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle2.jpg

>
> > >Would CS3 help here or perhaps some other program?

>
> > 4 to 5 minutes of fooling around with the original in Photoline-32. The front
> > fender and a quite a few other line details overall could be done much better
> > but that might take another 2 to 3 minutes. I only spend appreciable time on
> > restoration when pay is involved. The front fender problem caused by my
> > overzealous use of the Light/Shadow tool to try to reclaim some non-existent
> > details in the blacks and it only compounded some editing problems. Should have
> > saved that step for last or kept a lightened copy open alongside for reference
> > but I wanted to see what was there before starting.

>
> >http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1271/...54185859_o.jpg

>
> > Those blues a little oversaturated too. Easy to pull those back using
> > Photoline's, much better than PhotoShop's, hue/saturation tool, while enhancing
> > that red car a bit.

>
> Holy ****, very nice work. Looks like you also ran some kind of sharpening
> on it also. What would the learning curve be for Photoline?


Kodak put out some really good scanning stuff. Digital ROC
(restoration of color), GEM and a few others. If you intend to work
with old photos, it's essential stuff IMO. I use ROC Pro almost daily
and swear by it. The normal version is OK for most people. You can get
a free trial. http://www.asf.com/ As for the process of fixing up the
scratches, Clone, clone, clone. It's the only way to do it quickly.

wNp

 
Reply With Quote
 
EdiTOR
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2007
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:11:55 -0700, D_Mac <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Sep 14, 12:02 pm, RBrickston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:40:15 GMT, RBrickston <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>
>> > >I'm using PS 7, mostly the healing brush, but this old snapshot is getting
>> > >really difficult in some areas, particularly the horizontal cracking
>> > >across the hood, the variation of shadows on either side of the crack is
>> > >not allowing me to get a good cloning area.

>>
>> > >Here is the original unmodified scan:

>>
>> > >http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle1.jpg

>>
>> > >The original was a consumer 3.5" x 3.5" photo which I scanned at 2000 dpi.
>> > >Before I started with the Healing Brush, I did a color balance and levels
>> > >only.

>>
>> > >Here's where I'm at so far:

>>
>> > >http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Chevelle2.jpg

>>
>> > >Would CS3 help here or perhaps some other program?

>>
>> > 4 to 5 minutes of fooling around with the original in Photoline-32. The front
>> > fender and a quite a few other line details overall could be done much better
>> > but that might take another 2 to 3 minutes. I only spend appreciable time on
>> > restoration when pay is involved. The front fender problem caused by my
>> > overzealous use of the Light/Shadow tool to try to reclaim some non-existent
>> > details in the blacks and it only compounded some editing problems. Should have
>> > saved that step for last or kept a lightened copy open alongside for reference
>> > but I wanted to see what was there before starting.

>>
>> >http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1271/...54185859_o.jpg

>>
>> > Those blues a little oversaturated too. Easy to pull those back using
>> > Photoline's, much better than PhotoShop's, hue/saturation tool, while enhancing
>> > that red car a bit.

>>
>> Holy ****, very nice work. Looks like you also ran some kind of sharpening
>> on it also. What would the learning curve be for Photoline?


Unfortunately the learning curve is quite steep. It is an extremely advanced
editor with many more features than Photoshop and its not overly intuitive to
the western mind. But if you are familiar with other editors that will be a big
help in getting started. Here's a nice cross-reference list that someone put
together of just some of the tools available in Photoline for people wanting to
learn their way around when first starting out, if they are already familiar
with Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro.

http://www.geocities.com/advanced_ps..._reference.htm

Most of the problem in learning Photoline come from the authors not following
Adobe's nor anyone else's methods. Apparently they feel no need to, and I too
agree with them. As the author replied once when asked about this, "Who made
Adobe god?" Photoline even had an HDR tool long before Photoshop but they called
it the "Connect Images" tool due to German to English translation
idiosyncrasies. That is the other learning problem--the German to English
translations they used on many tools. Also, some methods are not done the same
in Photoline as in all other editors. The authors of Photoline found better ways
to do the same things. Check out all that can be done using the "Lasso" tool on
that cross-reference list. With just one click you can do nearly all your usual
editing that's needed for most photos.

Here's a good example from that page:

"Interestingly, you can select a crop area with the Lasso Tool, rotate the Lasso
while holding down CTRL, resize it proportionally or freely with ALT or SHIFT
keys, correct perspective with CTRL + ALT, select "Straighten" in the Lasso's
Tool Settings, input a Soft Edge number, and then press "Crop Lasso". This will
add a feathered border, remove any tilt, correct distortion, and crop the image
to your final Lasso/Mask all at once. (Hold down SHIFT while pressing "Crop
Lasso" puts your edits into a new window.) Seeing / Doing this just once starts
to make you appreciate why the authors didn't bother following others'
conventions. I, for one, am glad they didn't."

You might have to do some un-learning of inefficient and outdated methods that
you are accustomed to, to see and get the full use out of Photoline.

Download a copy and try it out. It's less than 8 megs to download. See if you
can find your way around. It's also some of the most efficient and eloquent use
of programming I have ever seen. To fit as much capability as Photoline has into
an 8 meg package is astounding. Its interface may not be "pretty" but it's a
major work-horse with no equal.


>
>Kodak put out some really good scanning stuff. Digital ROC
>(restoration of color), GEM and a few others. If you intend to work
>with old photos, it's essential stuff IMO. I use ROC Pro almost daily
>and swear by it. The normal version is OK for most people. You can get
>a free trial. http://www.asf.com/ As for the process of fixing up the
>scratches, Clone, clone, clone. It's the only way to do it quickly.
>
>wNp


You too might like Photoline. Its built-in "Remove Dust/Scratches" filter found
in the Filter > Quality > menu works better than ROC, or the one in Paint Shop
Pro that everyone seems to like so much. I forgot to try it out on this photo
when starting out. I should have, it would have cut my hand-edits to a fourth of
the time. I got distracted and forgot about it being there. Before sending this
reply I just tested it on that photo with settings of: Size 2, RGB channels,
Intensity 120%, Threshold 0. Indeed, it would have cut my hand-edits to less
than a fourth.

 
Reply With Quote
 
EdiTOR
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2007
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 04:26:04 GMT, EdiTOR <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:



>
>>
>>Kodak put out some really good scanning stuff. Digital ROC
>>(restoration of color), GEM and a few others. If you intend to work
>>with old photos, it's essential stuff IMO. I use ROC Pro almost daily
>>and swear by it. The normal version is OK for most people. You can get
>>a free trial. http://www.asf.com/ As for the process of fixing up the
>>scratches, Clone, clone, clone. It's the only way to do it quickly.
>>
>>wNp

>
>You too might like Photoline. Its built-in "Remove Dust/Scratches" filter found
>in the Filter > Quality > menu works better than ROC, or the one in Paint Shop
>Pro that everyone seems to like so much. I forgot to try it out on this photo
>when starting out. I should have, it would have cut my hand-edits to a fourth of
>the time. I got distracted and forgot about it being there. Before sending this
>reply I just tested it on that photo with settings of: Size 2, RGB channels,
>Intensity 120%, Threshold 0. Indeed, it would have cut my hand-edits to less
>than a fourth.


Sorry, my error. I was reading too fast and confusing ROC with the freely
available Kodak plugin for dust/scratch removal.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: cs3 d90 raw help me please!!!!! ray Digital Photography 1 12-16-2008 08:37 PM
cs3 vs cs3 extended ? oleuncleted@aol.com Digital Photography 3 06-27-2008 01:21 PM
Photoshop CS3 or Dreamweaver CS3 on WinXP-64? Mike J.S. Windows 64bit 4 10-07-2007 06:18 AM
Photoshop CS3 Beta available for download Wayne J. Cosshall Digital Photography 6 12-16-2006 01:57 AM
FileUtils.touch not consistent with system('touch') Han Holl Ruby 4 10-12-2006 05:36 AM



Advertisments