RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: isitdust on Monday 05 January 15 20:59 GMT (UK)
-
Hello
Can anything be done to enhance this photo please!!
regards and thanking you in anticipation
Peter
-
I am really interested to know how you've scanned this - 'cos I honestly don't know - - can see that it is at 300dpi which is a big tick - but there's something odd -
going to ask a guru . . . . . .
This is what I am seeing and I can't draw, nor would I want to draw what I can't see, so . . . :-\
Wiggy
-
Not sure about a guru, but she asked me :)
It's either sharpening in the scanning process (did you use an auto-sharpening) - but not sure why - on just those points or the scanner's faulty or the image is faulty.
I'll download and have a more detailed look.
gadget
PS - it might have been scanned at 300 but it must be very very compressed to be that size. I think a rescan is needed.
-
Is it from a slide?? It looks really odd. :-\ :-\
-
hello
thanks for looking at photo
yes something wrong
I'll rescan and repost if that's ok
peter
-
hello
Here is a freshly scanned version
The white speckles are on the photo
Thank you
Peter
-
Hi again Peter :)
Sorry to come back again and ask for yet another scan but it looks as if, although you've scanned at 300dpi, you've compressed it. This means that all the pixels are visible if it's enlarged for restoring. It's easy to make this mistake with jpg see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG
What you need to do is to make sure that when you save the file you save it with Minimum Compression or High Quality (depending on your program). Your file is only 51kb and you can put a file of up to 500 kb on here.
Gadget
-
To me I also think the first one may have been sharpened (hence the black edges of the white damaged areas) or it's a result of compression (reducing the amount of data in a photo so the file size is reduced). Unfortunately, compressing a .jpg file loses quality, but if you scan at 300dpi and resize to just under half a meg (500kb), you will still get a decent quality pic to print.
A good free product to use to resize photos is Infraview. There is a post about resizing at the top of the board (separate from my scanning tut).
Just a note for everyone, even though I have said in my tutorial scan at 300 - 600ppi, please just set your scanner to 300ppi which is industry standard. If you scan at 600ppi or higher you will end up with a much bigger file size that needs reducing to under 500kb, and if you are not proficient at resizing, you will end up with an even worse compressed file.
Caz
-
Not enough info for the child.
cheers
-
thank you restore45 that was a brilliant image and really lfe like tooo!!!!great job!!!
have scanned at 600dpi if this helps
regards
peter
-
same image BUT larger file size
-
I think something has happened to the original as there isn't any facial detail of the baby that I can see. Perhaps water damage? ???
Caz
-
The baby looks like a negative image in my software too ???
Carol
-
I was actually going to say the bub has an "X ray" like appearance, but I didn't want to offend or be insensitive. :-\ The chap can be saved, but the facial details for the baby would have to be made up which I personally wouldn't do.
Caz
-
I'm wondering if the baby may have been added....the hand holding the baby looks out of proportion and more like a lady's hand...but I could be wrong.
Carol
-
Are you scanning a neg here or a print? I think the problem here may be that the original photo is "silvered" This is making the surface of the photo reflect and refract the scanner light all over the place, like a distorted mirror really, therefore no real image detail is being scanned. If you tip the photo at an angle in certain light and it looks silvery blackish on the surface then I think that is where the problem lies. It might help to scan the pic at various angles to see if you can reduce the effect. It might be possible to combine a few scans of the image which have been scanned at different angles to get the best from each area. However I think it is going to be difficult to do and the scans need to be identical in size and res so they can be combined as required.
This problem is generally caused by the original film being inadequately fixed and or washed in the wet darkroom. It may be possible to re-fix and wash the neg or print if you have that possibility, and dry carefully not allowing any droplets on the surface. Probably best undertaken by someone with experience in a wet darkroom.
Not very encouraging I am afraid but I hope it helps.