Restoration of an 1887 Photo

[Crotale]

An old friend, and I do mean that he is old, asked me to clean up and restore a photo taken of his great grandmother and grandmother circa 1887. The original was not in too bad a shape, but my friend had one shot to scan it into his computer, for the paper was deteriorated. This being my first and only restoration project, I wanted to take my time and learn the processes involved.

I tried to leave the dirty look to the abode itself, as the old guy confirmed this was the state of the structure's exterior. This was reminiscent of the Midwest US in the late 1800's. I also added a vignette to give the final image more depth.

 

[Paul]

What process have you used?
For me it is to sterile now, nice work though.

 

[Crotale]

What process have you used?

Mostly used my Wacom tablet to get down to the pixel level in order to smooth out inconsistencies. I had to recreate some of the textures and lines due to my overuse of smudge to clean the image up.

For me it is to sterile now, nice work though.

Thanks. I made it to the old guy's specs. He wanted it smooth and with very little grain since he wanted to use it for family Christmas cards that year.

 

[Paul]

Nice to hear you got what the OP requested from your effort

 

[ibclare]

I agree with Paul. That was my first reaction. But I think the whole issue - maybe - is the high contrast. A bit too for the image and the fact that is an old photo. I think it should look softer.

But, good work for a first attempt!

 

[Crotale]

I agree with Paul. That was my first reaction. But I think the whole issue - maybe - is the high contrast. A bit too for the image and the fact that is an old photo. I think it should look softer.

But, good work for a first attempt!

Thanks!

My earliest attempts (out of about two dozen restarts over a year) took me to a soft and somewhat grainy look, much like the original. However, the old guy wanted it to be a fairly high contrast image with deeper black levels for printing , so I gave him what he asked for. That, of course, meant reducing the amount of artificial grain to a minimum in order to maintain consistency across the final picture.

Edit: At one point, I has actually colorized the image, but the old fella wanted to keep it as a B&W.

 

[iDad]

I'm just curious, what was the scan resolution. I ask because the detail in the faces is almost alien like. The contast is well done but it looks like you didn't have much detail to work with.

 

[Crotale]

The scan was something to the tune of 5x8in at 150 DPI. If I recall correctly, I upconverted the resolution to 10x16in at 240 DPI.

 

[iDad]

I see, perhaps a higher res scan may help a bit with the faces, I'm not an expect with scanning but I would have gone at least three times higher with dpi. But if the gentlemen is happy then you did good, with what you had to work with.(probably not much detail in the original anyway)

 

[Crotale]

I cannot get another scan, as the old guy had access to the original print for a short time before I started the project. As you can see from the scan, the facial features were severely lacking, so I had little to work with, unfortunately. Well, at least, at my skill level perhaps.

 

[ibclare]

Thanks!

My earliest attempts (out of about two dozen restarts over a year) took me to a soft and somewhat grainy look, much like the original. However, the old guy wanted it to be a fairly high contrast image with deeper black levels for printing , so I gave him what he asked for. That, of course, meant reducing the amount of artificial grain to a minimum in order to maintain consistency across the final picture.

Edit: At one point, I has actually colorized the image, but the old fella wanted to keep it as a B&W.

Then you did a good job. Always give the client what he wants!

 

[sprucemagoo1]

I like it, though you may have gone a bit too far in the cleaning process. although it would now look good colourized.

 

[Tom Mann]

"...The scan was something to the tune of 5x8in at 150 DPI. If I recall correctly, I upconverted the resolution to 10x16in at 240 DPI...."

Don't do that. By up-rez'ing, you didn't accomplish anything. Just scan it at 300 or more dpi right from the start, then down-rez it at the end for various specific, lower-rez uses.

In addition, the VERY STRONG recommendation from archivists / conservators is to ALWAYS spend the most time getting a good scan and then be sure to bundle the un-touched scan with your re-touched version when you deliver it to the client.

The reasoning behind this is that while the physical copy of the image is guaranteed to degrade over time, new retouching algorithms / software are always being developed and there is always someone with better skills than you, so don't think you just produced the definitive version for all time.

Tom

 

[Crotale]

"...The scan was something to the tune of 5x8in at 150 DPI. If I recall correctly, I upconverted the resolution to 10x16in at 240 DPI...."

Don't do that. By up-rez'ing, you didn't accomplish anything. Just scan it at 300 or more dpi right from the start, then down-rez it at the end for various specific, lower-rez uses.

In addition, the VERY STRONG recommendation from archivists / conservators is to ALWAYS spend the most time getting a good scan and then be sure to bundle the un-touched scan with your re-touched version when you deliver it to the client.

I agree with you on your points, and they are excellent point, but I had different marching orders. I also had no access to the original print. The single scan was provided to me. The old guy only had one opportunity to scan the original print for an afternoon, which occurred months before I entered the project.

The reasoning behind this is that while the physical copy of the image is guaranteed to degrade over time, new retouching algorithms / software are always being developed and there is always someone with better skills than you, so don't think you just produced the definitive version for all time.

I understand that, thanks. It is all up to the old man as to what he and his family do with the original and any other variants. I did not claim to have the "definitive" version at all, so I take some umbrage to your comment. As I stated earlier, this was and is my only restoration project to date, so my only claim is that I have made a singular attempt at photo restoration.

edit:/ Don't get me wrong, I know I that my restoration skills and knowledge is fairly low, and that your suggestions and information is very helpful to have for future projects.

 

[iDad]

Tom, tends to get long winded but everything said is to only point you in right direction FYI.

 

[Crotale]

Tom, tends to get long winded but everything said is to only point you in right direction FYI.

I get that, I really do. I tend to get overly sensitive to comments claiming I said declared something I was not aware that I said. I did not believe I came across as giving the impression that any version of the image from me was "final" other than being the final version that was delivered by me. I suppose I could have said it was the delivered version for sake of clarity.

 

[iDad]

You stated it was your first restoration, not bad bud! keep at it!

 

[Vetoed]

The original photo didnt need restoration imo. The new one looks computerised (digital art) loses it values in my eyes

 

[iDad]

Only real value is the real image, digitizing will be a little value anyway

 

[Tom Mann]

I agree with you on your points, and they are excellent point, but I had different marching orders. I also had no access to the original print. The single scan was provided to me. The old guy only had one opportunity to scan the original print for an afternoon, which occurred months before I entered the project.

Ahh. Sorry. I did understand that he was the one who had to do the scan, and he only had one chance to do so, but I didn't understand the timing. Usually the person doing the retouching / restoration is heavily involved right from the start of the process, so I thought you might have been able to give him behind the scene pointers on how to scan the document. NBD.[/quote]

I understand that, thanks. It is all up to the old man as to what he and his family do with the original and any other variants. I did not claim to have the "definitive" version at all, so I take some umbrage to your comment...

Again, my apologies - I wasn't paying attention to who_did_what, and who_had_what in this particular situation. Unfortunately, every few months, with almost clockwork regularity, I hear of a case where the owner / custodian of the document thinks that once the restoration work is "done", they think they can throw out the physical, original document. I also hear of cases where the restorer will only give the owner/custodian the end result of their work, and not also supply the original scan (that they did) along with more general advice and recommendations to the client about conservation / archiving.

Best regards,

Tom M