Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Wedding photo 1918  (Read 411 times)

Offline Jackiemh

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Wedding photo 1918
« on: Thursday 24 August 23 05:20 BST (UK) »
This is a photo of my grandparents' wedding (Henry E Bower & Violet J Strickson nee Cattermole).
Can you sharpen the image as it is rather blurry. I don't want it coloured just clearer.
Jackie
Bateman, Baylis, Bellotti, Boag, Bower (Stillgebauer), Cattermole, Chester, Dullage, Felix, French, Fursse, Garrett, Gilbert, Harding, Haynes, Hazelwood, Plume, Putland, Rudge, Strickson, Vine, Warren, Whitehead, Whitehorn, Wiltshire, Youthed and many more

Offline RJ137

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,714
    • View Profile
Re: Wedding photo 1918
« Reply #1 on: Thursday 24 August 23 20:16 BST (UK) »
My Try-sharpened with original tint

Offline Jackiemh

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Wedding photo 1918
« Reply #2 on: Thursday 24 August 23 20:31 BST (UK) »
Thank you = that is so much clearer.
Jackie
Bateman, Baylis, Bellotti, Boag, Bower (Stillgebauer), Cattermole, Chester, Dullage, Felix, French, Fursse, Garrett, Gilbert, Harding, Haynes, Hazelwood, Plume, Putland, Rudge, Strickson, Vine, Warren, Whitehead, Whitehorn, Wiltshire, Youthed and many more

Offline jmagarac

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Wedding photo 1918
« Reply #3 on: Thursday 24 August 23 20:45 BST (UK) »
Probably a long shot... but, is there any possibility that you could obtain a higher resolution scan? Probably not... but even slightly higher would help tremendously. You have a lot of pixel slurring occurring in your supplied scan. That slurring occurs at lower resolution scans and well as JPEG artifacting - or a combination of both. Just a thought. Here is a quick run through of a filter.

Offline jmagarac

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Wedding photo 1918
« Reply #4 on: Thursday 24 August 23 20:48 BST (UK) »
Here is examples of that pixel slurring that I was mentioning.

Offline jmagarac

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Wedding photo 1918
« Reply #5 on: Thursday 24 August 23 20:53 BST (UK) »
Some contrast added...

Offline jmagarac

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Wedding photo 1918
« Reply #6 on: Thursday 24 August 23 21:20 BST (UK) »
On Screen Full View...

Offline Jackiemh

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Wedding photo 1918
« Reply #7 on: Thursday 24 August 23 21:32 BST (UK) »
I am quite amazed with the results. Thank you
A definite improvement on the original - which was a probably a copy of a copy.
Jackie
Bateman, Baylis, Bellotti, Boag, Bower (Stillgebauer), Cattermole, Chester, Dullage, Felix, French, Fursse, Garrett, Gilbert, Harding, Haynes, Hazelwood, Plume, Putland, Rudge, Strickson, Vine, Warren, Whitehead, Whitehorn, Wiltshire, Youthed and many more

Online japeflakes

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,309
    • View Profile
Re: Wedding photo 1918
« Reply #8 on: Friday 25 August 23 07:52 BST (UK) »
A quick attempt but NOT as good :-(
Pages: [1] 2