Specific Having hard time getting a clearer version of this photo, thanks

[BaltimoreDave]

 

[kabak]

An attempt

 

[JeffK]

Best I can get...

 

[thebestcpu]

Hi @BaltimoreDave
Recovery of an image is highly dependent on the original image. Much better results will be obtained (if original is available) to scan at considerably higher resolution and save in a lossless format such as PNG or TIFF. Let me show you why.

JPEG images when set to low quality (to reduce file size) hides the compression mostly in the color components of the image. Below is that Saturation channel for you image showing it is blocked up in 16 bit squares. Hue is very similar in how it is blocked up. That makes more difficult to achieve the best result.



I tried my hand at it including applying some Topaz AI filtering and the results were not very please for the entire image. Some pieces looked decent yet hard to know if it represents the original person. The rest of the image was poor to comical in how the AI software tried to help. Best to get a better original and re-ask for some post processing in my opinion.

John Wheeler

 

[ex_teacher]

Like the Best CPU I tried using the latest Topaz software. It does a remarkable job on the faces but ther hands ar a mess. Here's my best compromise.

 

[JeffK]

Like the Best CPU I tried using the latest Topaz software. It does a remarkable job on the faces but ther hands ar a mess. Here's my best compromise.

Gigapixel did the same. Good face recovery but the rest of the image was a noisy mess.

 

[Babine]

 

[BaltimoreDave]

An attempt
View attachment 135303View attachment 135304

Thanks for the try

 

[BaltimoreDave]

Hi @BaltimoreDave
Recovery of an image is highly dependent on the original image. Much better results will be obtained (if original is available) to scan at considerably higher resolution and save in a lossless format such as PNG or TIFF. Let me show you why.

JPEG images when set to low quality (to reduce file size) hides the compression mostly in the color components of the image. Below is that Saturation channel for you image showing it is blocked up in 16 bit squares. Hue is very similar in how it is blocked up. That makes more difficult to achieve the best result.

View attachment 135306

I tried my hand at it including applying some Topaz AI filtering and the results were not very please for the entire image. Some pieces looked decent yet hard to know if it represents the original person. The rest of the image was poor to comical in how the AI software tried to help. Best to get a better original and re-ask for some post processing in my opinion.

John Wheeler

View attachment 135308

Thanks, I have Gigapixel AI and I was hoping there was a better option.

 

[BaltimoreDave]

Best I can get...

View attachment 135305

Thanks for the try

 

[BaltimoreDave]

Here is another one

View attachment 135363

Thanks, I know it, I have the same software, wasn't sure if Photoshop with all the Guru's might do better. LOL Hands for sure.

 

[Trevoc]

View attachment 135295

 

[JeffK]

@Trevoc - excellent recovery. Can you give us some insight into your process?

 

[Trevoc]

@Trevoc - excellent recovery. Can you give us some insight into your process?

The top picture of the girl alone, was originally done by "thebestcpu", I put it through Topaz AI Sharpen and another filter called "Anthropics Portrait Pro" which is a nice program for improving skin tone and other aspects of the face.

The second photo, of the three kids, was done by "ex_teacher", I put it through Topaz AI and Photoshop Camera Raw.

I have to declare, I copied the photos from both members, without bothering to see who posted them, I wasn't intending to plagiarize, I guess I was in a hurry to grab the photos and do my improvements. When I reposted my work, I dis so in the wrong place and only then realized what I had done. I didn't delete them, in hopes that "baltimoredave" would still be able to use my alterations.
I promise to be more attentive in the future as to who posted what.

 

[thebestcpu]

Great work @Trevoc and its not plagiarism either.
It's even it the rules that its fine to leverage others work unless they express specifically they don't want it leverage.
So I think it is great that you improved on images already posted and thanks for the attribution as well.
Thanks also for sharing the added steps you took.

Here are the snippets from the Free Photoshop Request forum rules that cover leveraging images posted in this forum:

• You may use/add to/remix another person's work that has already been submitted for a free Photoshop request, unless otherwise specified by the poster. Please consider giving them credit/attribution if you use their work.
• If you do not wish to allow other users to use your work, you may opt out by stating that you do not want your work re-used when you post it. By default, any work submitted in the free edit forum is considered fair use for additional edits, changes, remixes etc.

John Wheeler

 

[Trevoc]

Great work @Trevoc and its not plagiarism either.
It's even it the rules that its fine to leverage others work unless they express specifically they don't want it leverage.
So I think it is great that you improved on images already posted and thanks for the attribution as well.
Thanks also for sharing the added steps you took.

Here are the snippets from the Free Photoshop Request forum rules that cover leveraging images posted in this forum:


John Wheeler

Thank you John for the compliment, and for taking time to share the rules. I'm sorry I missed that part when I joined recently.
I have a group where I do free edits, and I personally never improve on someone's work because I don't want it to appear that I am upstaging them by improving their work. Our group rules are to never critique another editor, if you can do better, just do it and let the requester decide which they liked best. I tried to live by my own rules when I realized what assumed was a rule here as well. I will be looking at future edits to make sure there is no condition to not improve their work, and I will attribute credit to anyone's work I do improve. Having said that, I usually take original photos and do my own editing and let my work speak for itself be it good or not.

Thanks again for your input and compliment!

 

[JeffK]

Thank you John for the compliment, and for taking time to share the rules. I'm sorry I missed that part when I joined recently.
I have a group where I do free edits, and I personally never improve on someone's work because I don't want it to appear that I am upstaging them by improving their work. Our group rules are to never critique another editor, if you can do better, just do it and let the requester decide which they liked best. I tried to live by my own rules when I realized what assumed was a rule here as well. I will be looking at future edits to make sure there is no condition to not improve their work, and I will attribute credit to anyone's work I do improve. Having said that, I usually take original photos and do my own editing and let my work speak for itself be it good or not.

Thanks again for your input and compliment!

All good and absolutely no harm done. We'll often "collaborate" on an image when we've hit roadblocks and "borrow" images to improve on along with giving credit to the original editor. As in Photoshop, there never is just one solution and I do appreciate you providing some insight into how you got to where the OP wanted to go. And that's the most important objective - with learniing process as a benefit.