Photo of Great aunt gertie

[AMBA]

Sharpen image of Great Aunt Lizette  in the 1800's in India

[Mike Morrell (NL)]

Hi Amber,

I'll take a look to see what can be done but the quality of the file is too low to do any real sharpening. It's very small (75KB while rootschat allows up to 500 KB). If it was scanned at 300 dpi (standard quality) the actual size of the photo should be less than 2 inches wide and 3 inches high. If it's any larger then the scan resolution was too low. A higher resolution (600 dpi) would have been better.
There are also signs of high 'jpg compression' (=low jpeg quality). These have nothing to do with the original photo but are additional 'damage' introduced by saving the scanned file at too low a jpg quality level.

It's very possible that you got the digital file from someone and don't have access to the original photo. But if you or someone you know still have the original photo, you might want to consider re-scanning it with a higher resolution and saving it with the best (or high) jpeg quality level. It's not always straightforward but checking and adjusting your scanner settings is the first step.

Close up (magnified 4 times) the original digital photo looks like this. To some extent we can 'smooth out' the damage but it's never going to get much sharper. Anything you can do to get a better quality file will undoubtedly get you better results.

Mike

[jim1]

To be a bit more precise, late 1870's India.

[Treetotal]

Hi Alba and welcome to Rootschat...Put simply...This is a Carte de Visite image which are quite small, if you have access to the original and can scan at a resolution of 400-600dpi the results will be much better. There is a tutorial at the top of the board to guide you through it. I agree with Jim's estimate.
Carol

[AMBA]

Hi Mike - Thanks for the update.  You are correct, I do not have the original photo and the person who sent it to me got it from another relative.  Neither are too familiar with techno stuff, so it will be difficult for me to explain to them.  Will try my best.  Many thanks for your efforts.

[Mike Morrell (NL)]

Hi AMBA,

Re image quality, no worries, we work with what's available. This is about as far as I can go. I hope it's a bit clearer than the original. There are other restorers on Rootschat with much more experience than I have so they may contribute other (better) versions. Despite the 'image quality' issues I raised, it's a wonderful photo and I enjoyed working on it.

Regards,

Mike

PS. It's a wonderful human gift to be able to 'see through' any damage (original or digital) and see the 'essence' of (the people in) old photos, though many of the details may have been lost or damaged. I love old photos! In digitally "cleaning up" and "enhancing" old photos there is IMHO a fine line between expressing the 'essence' of the photo more clearly and making enhancements/adjustments that make for a (technically) better photo but somehow lose the 'essence' along the way. I'm still learning to find and keep to the the line

[McGroger]

Welcome to Rootschat, Amba.
Here's my try.
Peter

[Treetotal]

Well done guys...Not an easy one to do...I think the child is holding a soft toy...I also think it's most likely that the child is a boy. One from me too.
Carol

[Mike Morrell (NL)]

Thanks Carol, I like your restore too. I agree on the left child probably being a boy - well done for spotting the soft toy! I think Peter and you both did a better job on the eyes (more natural) than I did and I really like your 'lighter touch' on the background. The people and background blend well together so that the photo as a whole (including ' digital noise') looks more consistent. Less separation between subject and background. I made a mental note of this for future reference!
Mike

Well done guys...Not an easy one to do...I think the child is holding a soft toy...I also think it's most likely that the child is a boy. One from me too.
Carol