daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Feb 13, 2012 19:40:08 GMT -5
Forget the Fruitgum Company, but the photo does date from 1910, or thereabouts. It was in my cousin's album and came from her mother. It was a bit battered and fairly mucky. I have cleaned it up digitally, which has improved things considerably. The improvement is more obvious when the full-size file is viewed. The one thing I'm not sure of is whether the change to black and white is better than the original sepia colour. Perhaps I'll re-instate the sepia.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Feb 14, 2012 3:15:08 GMT -5
The first one is the original and the second one the retouched picture ? If so, the first one looks much better, I think. Most visable at the pants of the boy. The second one is quite "noisy" or grainy, many details got lost, especially regarding the tonality. The first picture is a brilliant photograph though. 1910 ? Wow !!! Fantastic tonality, details, sharpness and if I imagine, that it has been taken indoors and obviously not in a studio.
I would probably not choose this way myself ( and it's also too expensive ), but I saw an interesting documentary on TV recently. One japanese guy, specialized on refurbishing old pictures ... and he does it completely analog with darkroom, chemicals and stuff. The results are impressive. He taught this art to himself by experimenting with this for decades. A truly rare profession.
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Feb 14, 2012 5:23:22 GMT -5
berndt,
Yes, it has got too dark on the trousers - it's easy to go back and amend that as it is the sepia colour (which I needn't have taken out in the first place).
There is a big difference in refurbishing old prints that are in decent condition using analogue and chemical means and those prints that are ripped and torn to shreds almost. Viewed at screen size the scratches and rips don't show up too much on the above photo. They are more visible on the original print, or when the scan is blown up more.
As I have said elsewhere, I have played around many years ago with toners, reducers and intensifiers: also spotting out, hand colouring too. Yes, if you stick at it you can become very proficient at it. If you stick at it even longer you can do a painting of the scene that will blow photography away in most respects. I don't know what that proves though.
Dave.
|
|
photax
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,915
|
Post by photax on Feb 14, 2012 16:08:14 GMT -5
Dave,
Good job ! I also think that the improvement shows up clearly at full size viewing. As Bernd said, refurbishing old pictures professionally is an artistic activity. I made some attempts in retouching 6x6 negatives by hand many years ago. I failed completely...
MIK
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Feb 14, 2012 19:07:47 GMT -5
MIK, I would never think of trying to retouch a negative, unless I had already become extremely skilled. I always found it bad enough working on an enlargement. I don't even edit an original file unless the file is RAW.
Dave.
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Feb 14, 2012 21:36:25 GMT -5
The sepia print sets the atmosphere of the period but the B & W is a much better print for viewing.
The subjects look rather apprehensive. The older boy is either angry or frightened.
It is an excellent restoration. There seems to be a slight overall haze in the original. It is gone in the restoration.
What is Fruitgum? It sounds good.
Mickey
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Feb 15, 2012 3:56:31 GMT -5
"The older boy is either angry or frightened."
I bet this was quite a long exposure, and they were probably told to keep still or else. As regards the "older boy", interestingly, and rather sadly, he died soon afterwards. I'm not quite sure how long, as I can't date the photo with real accuracy. Apparently he had tonsillitis.
I did hope one of you might say "oh, look, he's doing such-and-such". I assume he is flattening a photograph in the mangle-like thing on the bench. Perhaps it helps put a glaze on the print too, the top roller looks quite shiny. judging by the reflection on its surface.
The 1910 Fruitgum Company was an American pop group of forty or so years ago.
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Feb 15, 2012 11:02:24 GMT -5
Dave,
"The 1910 Fruitgum Company was an American pop group of forty or so years ago."
Surely that photo is more than 40 years old so Fruitgum must be older than 40.
When it was taken I am quite sure they were not plagued by pop groups. Perhaps a barbershop quartet?
I wonder if the mangle like thing isn't for laminating a print to a stiffer back.
Mickey
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2012 12:29:12 GMT -5
The touched up version is much better IMO. Frankly, I don't see any great loss in sharpness or tonality. Or maybe it's that I have never been a big fan of sepia tone. Great job, Dave.
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Feb 15, 2012 17:33:19 GMT -5
Wayne, thanks. I am undecided on sepia (and other tones). As far as I know this is the only print of this shot, but maybe my grandfather did a version that wasn't toned. If he did my uncle Alan (the younger boy in the photo) would have had it. My father wasn't born until a couple of years after the eldest died. I never really knew if he, my father, was just an 'accident' or a replacement for the lost son.
Mickey, it could be that - making sure it is stuck solid to a backing.
I presume in those days most paper was glossy and all the fancy coatings came later. Somewhere have a 1950s swatch of the Ilford range of papers - perhaps close to twenty different types.
|
|
Doug T.
Lifetime Member
Pettin' The Gator
Posts: 1,199
|
Post by Doug T. on Feb 15, 2012 17:47:16 GMT -5
Hi Dave!
Great job on the retouching! I've done it with a couple, and have to say that while the sepia gives it a nostalgic look that people seem to like, I prefer straight B&W. As to the other tones, the only one that I really like is when a photo is tinted to look like an old cyanotype. For some reason, I really like the look.
Doug
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Feb 15, 2012 18:08:23 GMT -5
There is a company in London which does remarkable retouching jobs. I presume a large database has been set up of 'body parts' that can be matched and used. They illustrate the point with two photos of a lady. One is missing all sorts of things with rips and tears: the other shows how she should look but totally the wrong angle, so not usable directly. The finished print is the 'dead spit' of the person its meant to be.
I've done a few where one eye is missing - by reverse cloning the good eye. This company, though, seem able to restore both eyes accurately - presumably as long as they have that second photo. There must be some measuring and indexing system in their programme (self developed apparently).
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Feb 15, 2012 19:56:05 GMT -5
Dave,
Glossy paper was given that additional gloss by squeegeeing it onto a ferrotype tin, making sure there were no air pockets, and allowing it to dry. With proper treatment of the tin and even more luck the print wouldn't stick. It always came off curled though.
Doug,
Way back in days of yore when I was a teenager (Yes, I really was.) I used to cyanotype some of my prints. I even succeeded in making cyanotype paper. It was a simple process using only potassium ferricyanide and ferric ammonium citrate. It was also called the Ferro-Prussiate or the Blue Print process. I made contact prints using a printing frame. It required a long exposure to sunlight. Fixing was done with only water. The coated paper had to be dried in the dark but coating and placing paper and negative could be done by room light.
Mickey
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Feb 15, 2012 20:26:59 GMT -5
Mickey, thanks for the information. Presumably someone later on came up with the chromed heated version. Did they use glass in those days do you think? It was a method I claim to have discovered for myself. It also worked for handkerchiefs. If sufficiently smoothed and left to dry on tiles or a window the hanky would come off virtually self-ironed.
Ferro-Prussiate - was that known as Prussian Blue?
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Feb 15, 2012 21:01:29 GMT -5
It also worked for handkerchiefs. If sufficiently smoothed and left to dry on tiles or a window the hanky would come off virtually self-ironed. Ferro-Prussiate - was that known as Prussian Blue? Dave, Take a look at the back of the Canadian dime (10ยข). It is a magnificent sailing ship that won every race it ever entered. It was, and its replica is, called The Bluenose. One of Canada's most beautiful stamps, printed in a Prussian blue colour by the intaglio process is of The Bluenose. Stamp Canada 1929 50c Bluenose.jpg Could the skipper have used one of your handkerchiefs? Mickey
|
|