Fixing flare caused by stray light entering camera

GE
Posted By
Gary Edstrom
Nov 1, 2008
Views
795
Replies
23
Status
Closed
Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂

You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is minor, and really doesn’t spoil the picture at all, but I would like to know how to go about fixing it if it is possible.

I have already cloned or healed away a number of scratches and specs of dirt. Getting rid of that light flare, and possibly reducing the glare off the white door behind us is all I see left to do.

Gary

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

PB
Paul Burdett
Nov 1, 2008
Hi Gary,

This is what I tried in Photoshopp CS3, and it worked well:

1.Using the pen tool I made a selection around the whole of your pants. I then desaturated the selection. The resulting b&w seemed to work well and looked realistic.
2. I made a selection around the small area on your father’s pants and applied a levels adjustment layer, darkening the selection to match the rest of the pants.
3. I then used the clone tool at a low opacity to clone the lighter areas of the door behind you.

"Gary Edstrom" wrote in message
Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is minor, and really doesn’t spoil the picture at all, but I would like to know how to go about fixing it if it is possible.

I have already cloned or healed away a number of scratches and specs of dirt. Getting rid of that light flare, and possibly reducing the glare off the white door behind us is all I see left to do.

Gary
R
Ragnar
Nov 1, 2008
"Gary Edstrom" wrote in message
Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is minor, and really doesn’t spoil the picture at all, but I would like to know how to go about fixing it if it is possible.

I have already cloned or healed away a number of scratches and specs of dirt. Getting rid of that light flare, and possibly reducing the glare off the white door behind us is all I see left to do.

Gary

If you look at the Red channel you will immediately see the problem. There is a red flare right down the centre of your photo, strongest at the bottom. Use the burn tool on the Red channel only, with brush size about 50 and 25% exposure setting; leave the Green and Blue channels alone – they are OK.

Hope this helps.
MR
Mike Russell
Nov 1, 2008
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 21:16:33 -0700, Gary Edstrom wrote:

Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is

Great picture!

More than likely the flare is confined to the red channel. Try working on that channel only as follows:

1) create a new layer filled with middle gray: RGB(127,127,127)
2) set the layer to Overlay
3) select the red channel
4) use a soft black brush, 10 percent transparency to paint darker gray to get rid of the flare
5) If you overdo it, press X and paint a lighter gray.

It may be more convenient start with a transparent layer instead of RGB(127,127,127), and use the eraser to remove any darkening effect. BTW – this technique is great for removing shadows as well – paint all 3 channels with a lighter gray instead of a darker gray, or paint white and reduce the transparency of the overlay layer.

I agree with you about the background glare. Using a large dodge brush along the upper edge would improve the composition.

The skin tones, and probabaly all the other colors, are too saturated and too red, while the background varies from green on the left to cyan on the right, and the shadows have a similar cast to them. These problem could be dealt with in RGB or CMYK mode using curves on the individual channels, getting rid of green and cyan in the shadows and highlights, and at the same time fixing the overly red midtones.

Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com
GE
Gary Edstrom
Nov 1, 2008
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 03:12:38 -0700, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 21:16:33 -0700, Gary Edstrom wrote:

Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is

Great picture!

More than likely the flare is confined to the red channel. Try working on that channel only as follows:

1) create a new layer filled with middle gray: RGB(127,127,127)
2) set the layer to Overlay
3) select the red channel
4) use a soft black brush, 10 percent transparency to paint darker gray to get rid of the flare
5) If you overdo it, press X and paint a lighter gray.

It may be more convenient start with a transparent layer instead of RGB(127,127,127), and use the eraser to remove any darkening effect. BTW – this technique is great for removing shadows as well – paint all 3 channels with a lighter gray instead of a darker gray, or paint white and reduce the transparency of the overlay layer.

I agree with you about the background glare. Using a large dodge brush along the upper edge would improve the composition.

The skin tones, and probabaly all the other colors, are too saturated and too red, while the background varies from green on the left to cyan on the right, and the shadows have a similar cast to them. These problem could be dealt with in RGB or CMYK mode using curves on the individual channels, getting rid of green and cyan in the shadows and highlights, and at the same time fixing the overly red midtones.

Thanks for the tip. This appears to work the best for me of the 3 methods given so far. I like the idea that it leaves the original picture untouched. As I am still fairly new at PS, it will take some trial-and-error to get it right. Thank goodness for being able to step backwards! One thing I have done is to draw a lasso around the affected area so that my brush strokes don’t go too far. I upped the transparency to 15% as it seemed to be applying the paint much too slowly to suit me.

I seem to have solved the glare problem off the door nicely. The whole picture seems to be too light near the top. So I created a gradient and moved off the top of the picture with just the very bottom of the dark to light fringe poking into the picture. After adjusting it a little, I think the result looks pretty good.

I’ll post my final result later.

I’m not concerned with the background color shift going from left-to-right on the picture. I’m definitely not to that level of pickiness yet. I wouldn’t have even noticed it if you hadn’t called it to my attention. This picture is just for family viewing, not a professional job.

This was one of a number of pictures that I came across as I went through my father’s effects after he died in 1998. Some of them include my sister. She hasn’t seen any of them. So I am putting together a package of 8×10 prints to give her at Christmas. Most of the time, my father used Kodachrome. All of those pictures are still as vivid as they day they were taken. Unfortunately, he also used some cut-rate film and processing at times. Many of those pictures are almost completely faced away.

Gary
JJ
John J
Nov 1, 2008
Great advice concerning the red channel. I suspect the issue isn’t flare but a processing error.

Anyway – awesome picture for the fifties design enthusiasts. My wife was knocked out!
GE
Gary Edstrom
Nov 1, 2008
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:04:53 -0700, Gary Edstrom
wrote:

One thing I have done is to draw a lasso around the affected area so that my brush strokes don’t go too far. I upped the transparency to 15% as it seemed to be applying the paint much too slowly to suit me.

Ok, I see that creating a selection was a bad idea. It makes for a harsh transition between the areas I am painting over and the rest of the picture.

Thank goodness I’m not working by the clock and can go back and redo things as many times as I want!

Gary
GE
Gary Edstrom
Nov 1, 2008
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 09:21:52 -0500, John J wrote:

Great advice concerning the red channel. I suspect the issue isn’t flare but a processing error.

Anyway – awesome picture for the fifties design enthusiasts. My wife was knocked out!

Pictures are almost the only memory I have of any of my grandparents.

My mom’s father died 13 years before I was born.

My dad’s mother died in 1951. I was only 2 years old and have no memory of her at all although there are some pictures of her holding me.

My dad’s father died in 1954. The only reason I have any memory of him is that my father brought him out to California to live with us after my grandmother died. He lived with us for about a year before he said that he wanted to go back home to Michigan where he died less than a year later.

My mom’s mother died in 1958. The last time I saw her, however, was 1956. Once again, the only reason I have any memories of her at all was that she lived with us for a while when my sister was born in 1954.

Gary
JJ
John J
Nov 1, 2008
Gary Edstrom wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 09:21:52 -0500, John J wrote:

Great advice concerning the red channel. I suspect the issue isn’t flare but a processing error.

Anyway – awesome picture for the fifties design enthusiasts. My wife was knocked out!

Pictures are almost the only memory I have of any of my grandparents.

Can you tell us about the person who decorated the room, chose the ties?
J
Joel
Nov 1, 2008
Gary Edstrom wrote:

Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is minor, and really doesn’t spoil the picture at all, but I would like to know how to go about fixing it if it is possible.

I have already cloned or healed away a number of scratches and specs of dirt. Getting rid of that light flare, and possibly reducing the glare off the white door behind us is all I see left to do.

Gary

It looks just fine to me. But *if* you just want to learn a new and more advanced trick then just get your Photoshop ready then try to follow some very basic steps.

1. Make a DUPE of the original. Now you have 2 layer

2. Adjusting one layer (lets say the LOWER one) so your daddy’s pant is DARKER

3. Click the Quick Mask option [o] on the TOP layer.

4. Then use PAINT BRUSH to REVIEW the darker pant from the lower layer.

All you have to do is learning to toggle between Black/White brush, using the Brush SIZE and OPACITY. I type in CAPITAL because those are the important part (Size and Opacity).

That’s it! it will work on pant, eyeglass, shirt, face, flare, shadow etc..
J
Joel
Nov 1, 2008
Gary Edstrom wrote:

On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:04:53 -0700, Gary Edstrom
wrote:

One thing I have done is to draw a lasso around the affected area so that my brush strokes don’t go too far. I upped the transparency to 15% as it seemed to be applying the paint much too slowly to suit me.

Ok, I see that creating a selection was a bad idea. It makes for a harsh transition between the areas I am painting over and the rest of the picture.

Thank goodness I’m not working by the clock and can go back and redo things as many times as I want!

Gary

Layer, Opacity, Mask, Brush Size etc.. can be very important for fine touch.

Opacity – for example, if you want to apply around 15% then instead of setting the Opacity to 15%, you may want to set to 5-7% then applying multiple times instead of just once.

Brush Size – around the edge you may want to use SOFT brush and changing the Brush Size to blend (smooth) around the edge.

You just need to master few basic commands like Layer, Masking, Opacity, Brush Size/Type
GE
Gary Edstrom
Nov 1, 2008
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:12:42 -0500, John J wrote:

Can you tell us about the person who decorated the room, chose the ties?

Wide ties with those patterns were typical in the early 1950’s. Nothing special about them. The house was a typical small post-WWII working class home. It had 2 bedrooms and 1 bath on a 50’x150′ lot. As kids we loved it because it had such a nice back yard. We lived in it from 1949 until the state of California came through in 1966 and took it to build a freeway. The house cost $9,200.00 on a 5% mortgate! Of course, my father was only earning about 75 cents per hour at the time at Lockheed Aircraft.

Those were the days when you knew everyone in the neighborhood. To this day I can still quote the names of most of the families on both sides of the street on our block even though I haven’t lived there for 42 years!

In the picture, you will notice a push-button style light switch on the wall. You pushed the upper button to turn the lights on and the bottom button to turn the lights off. The toggle switches you see today had not come into common use yet.

Gary
TC
tony cooper
Nov 1, 2008
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:16:33 -0500, Joel wrote:

Gary Edstrom wrote:

Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is minor, and really doesn’t spoil the picture at all, but I would like to know how to go about fixing it if it is possible.

I have already cloned or healed away a number of scratches and specs of dirt. Getting rid of that light flare, and possibly reducing the glare off the white door behind us is all I see left to do.

Gary

It looks just fine to me. But *if* you just want to learn a new and more advanced trick then just get your Photoshop ready then try to follow some very basic steps.

1. Make a DUPE of the original. Now you have 2 layer

2. Adjusting one layer (lets say the LOWER one) so your daddy’s pant is DARKER

3. Click the Quick Mask option [o] on the TOP layer.

4. Then use PAINT BRUSH to REVIEW the darker pant from the lower layer.
All you have to do is learning to toggle between Black/White brush, using the Brush SIZE and OPACITY. I type in CAPITAL because those are the important part (Size and Opacity).

That’s it! it will work on pant, eyeglass, shirt, face, flare, shadow etc..

What you get by this technique is a different colored pair of pants (darker or lighter), but with a distinct difference between what is now reddish and what is now not reddish. It does nothing to blend in the two colors in the pants.

I didn’t try it on this image, but I’ve done enough masking to know what masking is capable of. I wouldn’t even bother to try this. I can’t imagine why it was suggested.

The best suggestion so far is to create a dupe and desaturate the dupe. This takes away the reddish color and changes the trouser color to an acceptable and realistic gray. A second dupe layer of the original can be placed above this desaturated layer. A mask is added to this layer and the area of the trousers is painted out. The trousers then appear gray with a little lightness on the top leg, but that lightness looks like the effect of lighting on the figure and not flare. The only problem this leaves is the red sole of the child’s shoe. That’s not all that noticeable, though.

If this was my image, I’d pop the colors by working in channels before anything else. I’d work on the trousers last.


Tony Cooper – Orlando, Florida
JJ
John J
Nov 1, 2008
Gary Edstrom wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:12:42 -0500, John J wrote:

Can you tell us about the person who decorated the room, chose the ties?

Wide ties with those patterns were typical in the early 1950’s.

Design, not dimensions. I was referring to the designs on the ties. Oh, BTW, I was already 12 years-old then.

In the picture, you will notice a push-button style light switch on the wall. You pushed the upper button to turn the lights on and the bottom button to turn the lights off. The toggle switches you see today had not come into common use yet.

Yes. I’m more interested than ever who whom made the design decisions then. You are not into design, are you. So be it.
GE
Gary Edstrom
Nov 2, 2008
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 18:16:32 -0500, John J wrote:

Gary Edstrom wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:12:42 -0500, John J wrote:

Can you tell us about the person who decorated the room, chose the ties?

Wide ties with those patterns were typical in the early 1950’s.

Design, not dimensions. I was referring to the designs on the ties. Oh, BTW, I was already 12 years-old then.

In the picture, you will notice a push-button style light switch on the wall. You pushed the upper button to turn the lights on and the bottom button to turn the lights off. The toggle switches you see today had not come into common use yet.

Yes. I’m more interested than ever who whom made the design decisions then. You are not into design, are you. So be it.

I guess I don’t have even the slightest idea what you are asking then.
GE
Gary Edstrom
Nov 2, 2008
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 17:30:48 -0700, Gary Edstrom
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 18:16:32 -0500, John J wrote:

Gary Edstrom wrote:
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:12:42 -0500, John J wrote:

Can you tell us about the person who decorated the room, chose the ties?

Wide ties with those patterns were typical in the early 1950’s.

Design, not dimensions. I was referring to the designs on the ties. Oh, BTW, I was already 12 years-old then.

In the picture, you will notice a push-button style light switch on the wall. You pushed the upper button to turn the lights on and the bottom button to turn the lights off. The toggle switches you see today had not come into common use yet.

Yes. I’m more interested than ever who whom made the design decisions then. You are not into design, are you. So be it.

I guess I don’t have even the slightest idea what you are asking then.

If you were asking about who decorated the house or who selected clothing styles, there were no style decisions in selecting clothing or furniture for the home. My parents bought what they could afford. They had very little money to spare. Most furniture and clothing was second or third hand. Neither of them were looking for anything fashionable. They didn’t have the luxury of doing it.

Gary
J
Joel
Nov 2, 2008
tony cooper wrote:

On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:16:33 -0500, Joel wrote:

Gary Edstrom wrote:

Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is minor, and really doesn’t spoil the picture at all, but I would like to know how to go about fixing it if it is possible.

I have already cloned or healed away a number of scratches and specs of dirt. Getting rid of that light flare, and possibly reducing the glare off the white door behind us is all I see left to do.

Gary

It looks just fine to me. But *if* you just want to learn a new and more advanced trick then just get your Photoshop ready then try to follow some very basic steps.

1. Make a DUPE of the original. Now you have 2 layer

2. Adjusting one layer (lets say the LOWER one) so your daddy’s pant is DARKER

3. Click the Quick Mask option [o] on the TOP layer.

4. Then use PAINT BRUSH to REVIEW the darker pant from the lower layer.
All you have to do is learning to toggle between Black/White brush, using the Brush SIZE and OPACITY. I type in CAPITAL because those are the important part (Size and Opacity).

That’s it! it will work on pant, eyeglass, shirt, face, flare, shadow etc..

What you get by this technique is a different colored pair of pants (darker or lighter), but with a distinct difference between what is now reddish and what is now not reddish. It does nothing to blend in the two colors in the pants.

It doesn’t matter what color the pant or shirt is, and even with the wall behind. Or you can change the color if you wish, the technique is much smoother, easier to replace just about anything to just about any way you wish.

If you want to turn the pant to yellow, then use whatever command to turn the pant to yellow then use the command above to turn the final to yellow pant. If you want pink then samething. If you want yellow pant with pink wall then same thing it just doesn’t matter.

If you want to replace the whole background, then samething cuz it’s very flexible and you can just do anything you can think of. IOW, it’s some of the very basic trick then you can adapt to just about anything you wish.

I didn’t try it on this image, but I’ve done enough masking to know what masking is capable of. I wouldn’t even bother to try this. I can’t imagine why it was suggested.

I suggested because it’s and advanced technique, and it’s lot more effective than normal masking that most people use.

The best suggestion so far is to create a dupe and desaturate the dupe. This takes away the reddish color and changes the trouser color to an acceptable and realistic gray. A second dupe layer of the original can be placed above this desaturated layer. A mask is added to this layer and the area of the trousers is painted out. The trousers then appear gray with a little lightness on the top leg, but that lightness looks like the effect of lighting on the figure and not flare. The only problem this leaves is the red sole of the child’s shoe. That’s not all that noticeable, though.

If this was my image, I’d pop the colors by working in channels before anything else. I’d work on the trousers last.

The main trick that it doesn’t matter what technique you use to turn the pant to any color you wish, the main trick is to use MASKING command to blend/combine two layers together.

The trick that you do not want to create a Masked file which usually have problem around the edge that may require extra work to clean up. And I said using "Mask Command" but I don’t say creating a Masked File which is a different story.
TC
tony cooper
Nov 2, 2008
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 20:49:22 -0500, Joel wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:16:33 -0500, Joel wrote:

Gary Edstrom wrote:

Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is minor, and really doesn’t spoil the picture at all, but I would like to know how to go about fixing it if it is possible.

I have already cloned or healed away a number of scratches and specs of dirt. Getting rid of that light flare, and possibly reducing the glare off the white door behind us is all I see left to do.

Gary

It looks just fine to me. But *if* you just want to learn a new and more advanced trick then just get your Photoshop ready then try to follow some very basic steps.

1. Make a DUPE of the original. Now you have 2 layer

2. Adjusting one layer (lets say the LOWER one) so your daddy’s pant is DARKER

3. Click the Quick Mask option [o] on the TOP layer.

4. Then use PAINT BRUSH to REVIEW the darker pant from the lower layer.
All you have to do is learning to toggle between Black/White brush, using the Brush SIZE and OPACITY. I type in CAPITAL because those are the important part (Size and Opacity).

That’s it! it will work on pant, eyeglass, shirt, face, flare, shadow etc..

What you get by this technique is a different colored pair of pants (darker or lighter), but with a distinct difference between what is now reddish and what is now not reddish. It does nothing to blend in the two colors in the pants.

It doesn’t matter what color the pant or shirt is, and even with the wall behind. Or you can change the color if you wish, the technique is much smoother, easier to replace just about anything to just about any way you wish.

If you want to turn the pant to yellow, then use whatever command to turn the pant to yellow then use the command above to turn the final to yellow pant. If you want pink then samething. If you want yellow pant with pink wall then same thing it just doesn’t matter.

If you want to replace the whole background, then samething cuz it’s very flexible and you can just do anything you can think of. IOW, it’s some of the very basic trick then you can adapt to just about anything you wish.
I didn’t try it on this image, but I’ve done enough masking to know what masking is capable of. I wouldn’t even bother to try this. I can’t imagine why it was suggested.

I suggested because it’s and advanced technique, and it’s lot more effective than normal masking that most people use.

Your suggestion is the wrong way to use an advanced technique. It doesn’t solve the problem of the color difference in the trousers; it merely substitutes another color of trousers with a color difference.


Tony Cooper – Orlando, Florida
J
Joel
Nov 2, 2008
tony cooper wrote:

On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 20:49:22 -0500, Joel wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:16:33 -0500, Joel wrote:

Gary Edstrom wrote:

Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is minor, and really doesn’t spoil the picture at all, but I would like to know how to go about fixing it if it is possible.

I have already cloned or healed away a number of scratches and specs of dirt. Getting rid of that light flare, and possibly reducing the glare off the white door behind us is all I see left to do.

Gary

It looks just fine to me. But *if* you just want to learn a new and more advanced trick then just get your Photoshop ready then try to follow some very basic steps.

1. Make a DUPE of the original. Now you have 2 layer

2. Adjusting one layer (lets say the LOWER one) so your daddy’s pant is DARKER

3. Click the Quick Mask option [o] on the TOP layer.

4. Then use PAINT BRUSH to REVIEW the darker pant from the lower layer.
All you have to do is learning to toggle between Black/White brush, using the Brush SIZE and OPACITY. I type in CAPITAL because those are the important part (Size and Opacity).

That’s it! it will work on pant, eyeglass, shirt, face, flare, shadow etc..

What you get by this technique is a different colored pair of pants (darker or lighter), but with a distinct difference between what is now reddish and what is now not reddish. It does nothing to blend in the two colors in the pants.

It doesn’t matter what color the pant or shirt is, and even with the wall behind. Or you can change the color if you wish, the technique is much smoother, easier to replace just about anything to just about any way you wish.

If you want to turn the pant to yellow, then use whatever command to turn the pant to yellow then use the command above to turn the final to yellow pant. If you want pink then samething. If you want yellow pant with pink wall then same thing it just doesn’t matter.

If you want to replace the whole background, then samething cuz it’s very flexible and you can just do anything you can think of. IOW, it’s some of the very basic trick then you can adapt to just about anything you wish.
I didn’t try it on this image, but I’ve done enough masking to know what masking is capable of. I wouldn’t even bother to try this. I can’t imagine why it was suggested.

I suggested because it’s and advanced technique, and it’s lot more effective than normal masking that most people use.

Your suggestion is the wrong way to use an advanced technique. It doesn’t solve the problem of the color difference in the trousers; it merely substitutes another color of trousers with a color difference.

Well, you get to master the technique first then you can correct or tell me that I am doing the wrong way. Because that is one of the tricks I use quite often, and I use to make $$$$$$

And as I said and won’t mind to repeat it again, you can change the color of trousers to any collor you can name, you can change from pant to dress and my technique wouldn’t careless.

And one of the advanced techniques is try not to make thing more complicate, or anything that requires extra work, extra error, extra time etc. then try not to use it but learn to master the simplest way. And that’s why I mention try not to create the Masked File but using Mask Command instead, try not to use selection but use Layer and Mask Command instead.
TC
tony cooper
Nov 2, 2008
On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 07:59:45 -0600, Joel wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 20:49:22 -0500, Joel wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:16:33 -0500, Joel wrote:

Gary Edstrom wrote:

Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is minor, and really doesn’t spoil the picture at all, but I would like to know how to go about fixing it if it is possible.

I have already cloned or healed away a number of scratches and specs of dirt. Getting rid of that light flare, and possibly reducing the glare off the white door behind us is all I see left to do.

Gary

It looks just fine to me. But *if* you just want to learn a new and more advanced trick then just get your Photoshop ready then try to follow some very basic steps.

1. Make a DUPE of the original. Now you have 2 layer

2. Adjusting one layer (lets say the LOWER one) so your daddy’s pant is DARKER

3. Click the Quick Mask option [o] on the TOP layer.

4. Then use PAINT BRUSH to REVIEW the darker pant from the lower layer.
All you have to do is learning to toggle between Black/White brush, using the Brush SIZE and OPACITY. I type in CAPITAL because those are the important part (Size and Opacity).

That’s it! it will work on pant, eyeglass, shirt, face, flare, shadow etc..

What you get by this technique is a different colored pair of pants (darker or lighter), but with a distinct difference between what is now reddish and what is now not reddish. It does nothing to blend in the two colors in the pants.

It doesn’t matter what color the pant or shirt is, and even with the wall behind. Or you can change the color if you wish, the technique is much smoother, easier to replace just about anything to just about any way you wish.

If you want to turn the pant to yellow, then use whatever command to turn the pant to yellow then use the command above to turn the final to yellow pant. If you want pink then samething. If you want yellow pant with pink wall then same thing it just doesn’t matter.

If you want to replace the whole background, then samething cuz it’s very flexible and you can just do anything you can think of. IOW, it’s some of the very basic trick then you can adapt to just about anything you wish.
I didn’t try it on this image, but I’ve done enough masking to know what masking is capable of. I wouldn’t even bother to try this. I can’t imagine why it was suggested.

I suggested because it’s and advanced technique, and it’s lot more effective than normal masking that most people use.

Your suggestion is the wrong way to use an advanced technique. It doesn’t solve the problem of the color difference in the trousers; it merely substitutes another color of trousers with a color difference.

Well, you get to master the technique first then you can correct or tell me that I am doing the wrong way. Because that is one of the tricks I use quite often, and I use to make $$$$$$

And as I said and won’t mind to repeat it again, you can change the color of trousers to any collor you can name, you can change from pant to dress and my technique wouldn’t careless.

And one of the advanced techniques is try not to make thing more complicate, or anything that requires extra work, extra error, extra time etc. then try not to use it but learn to master the simplest way. And that’s why I mention try not to create the Masked File but using Mask Command instead, try not to use selection but use Layer and Mask Command instead.

You should go into politics. You have the ability to produce a great number of words without the sum of the words meaning anything.


Tony Cooper – Orlando, Florida
JJ
John J
Nov 2, 2008
Gary Edstrom wrote:

If you were asking about who decorated the house or who selected clothing styles, there were no style decisions in selecting clothing or furniture for the home. My parents bought what they could afford. They had very little money to spare. Most furniture and clothing was second or third hand. Neither of them were looking for anything fashionable. They didn’t have the luxury of doing it.

I pointed a friend to the picture. He is a well-established designer in Israel and Europe and he called it "Jewish Renaissance". Indeed, I am as puzzled by that term as anyone must be. You see, that bark cloth is a huge collectible for fifties enthusiasts, and the ties are too, mainly for the design on them. Cultish, in fact. The ties were anything but cheap then. I remember!
JJ
John J
Nov 2, 2008
tony cooper wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 07:59:45 -0600, Joel wrote:

And one of the advanced techniques is try not to make thing more complicate, or anything that requires extra work, extra error, extra time etc. then try not to use it but learn to master the simplest way. And that’s why I mention try not to create the Masked File but using Mask Command instead, try not to use selection but use Layer and Mask Command instead.

You should go into politics. You have the ability to produce a great number of words without the sum of the words meaning anything.

Maybe Joel will privilege us with an example of what he means by making-over the photograph himself to show us.

To the OP: have fun with this. Try my tip of using the sponge tool to selectively desaturate, starting with your father’s trousers. Then copy the layer and put it into Color mode and paint over the trousers. A deep blue is good.

Just for fun and education, too.
TC
tony cooper
Nov 2, 2008
On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 08:51:46 -0600, John J wrote:

Gary Edstrom wrote:

If you were asking about who decorated the house or who selected clothing styles, there were no style decisions in selecting clothing or furniture for the home. My parents bought what they could afford. They had very little money to spare. Most furniture and clothing was second or third hand. Neither of them were looking for anything fashionable. They didn’t have the luxury of doing it.

I pointed a friend to the picture. He is a well-established designer in Israel and Europe and he called it "Jewish Renaissance". Indeed, I am as puzzled by that term as anyone must be. You see, that bark cloth is a huge collectible for fifties enthusiasts, and the ties are too, mainly for the design on them. Cultish, in fact. The ties were anything but cheap then. I remember!

Those neckties are from the 40s. The picture may have been taken in 1952, but those designs were quite common in the 40s. The two men don’t look like the type who discarded old ties when the fashion changed and bought new neckties in the fashion-of-the-day. Although, the younger man – your father – appears to be a dapper and handsome man.

Like my father, they probably wore their neckties until the gravy stains were so noticeable by the wife of the house that the ties went out in the trash. If I dig through enough old photographs of my father, I’ll probably find him wearing a similar tie in the early 50s.

My father was a pretty sharp dresser, though. Here’s a photo taken sometime around 1944/45. I’m the one on the right. Notice my two-tone shoes!

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f244/cooper213/crc.jpg

I don’t know how much ties cost in the early 50s, but when I got out of college in 1960 and moved to Chicago, I remember buying neckties for $1.00 in a tie store on Michigan Avenue. Knit ties and Rooster ties were popular then. I bought "rep" ties from Brooks Brothers when I could afford $5.00 ties. I think the most expensive ties around were Countess Mara ties, and they probably went for at least $10.


Tony Cooper – Orlando, Florida
J
Joel
Nov 2, 2008
tony cooper wrote:

On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 07:59:45 -0600, Joel wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 20:49:22 -0500, Joel wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:16:33 -0500, Joel wrote:

Gary Edstrom wrote:

Here is a photo that I am working on that was taken in June 1952 of me, my father, and my grandfather.

http://gbe.dynip.com/misc/RC0105A.jpg

Egad! That can’t be over 56 years ago already!!! 🙂
You will notice a light flare on my father’s pants leg and on my lap where some stray light entered the camera and fogged the film. It is minor, and really doesn’t spoil the picture at all, but I would like to know how to go about fixing it if it is possible.

I have already cloned or healed away a number of scratches and specs of dirt. Getting rid of that light flare, and possibly reducing the glare off the white door behind us is all I see left to do.

Gary

It looks just fine to me. But *if* you just want to learn a new and more advanced trick then just get your Photoshop ready then try to follow some very basic steps.

1. Make a DUPE of the original. Now you have 2 layer

2. Adjusting one layer (lets say the LOWER one) so your daddy’s pant is DARKER

3. Click the Quick Mask option [o] on the TOP layer.

4. Then use PAINT BRUSH to REVIEW the darker pant from the lower layer.
All you have to do is learning to toggle between Black/White brush, using the Brush SIZE and OPACITY. I type in CAPITAL because those are the important part (Size and Opacity).

That’s it! it will work on pant, eyeglass, shirt, face, flare, shadow etc..

What you get by this technique is a different colored pair of pants (darker or lighter), but with a distinct difference between what is now reddish and what is now not reddish. It does nothing to blend in the two colors in the pants.

It doesn’t matter what color the pant or shirt is, and even with the wall behind. Or you can change the color if you wish, the technique is much smoother, easier to replace just about anything to just about any way you wish.

If you want to turn the pant to yellow, then use whatever command to turn the pant to yellow then use the command above to turn the final to yellow pant. If you want pink then samething. If you want yellow pant with pink wall then same thing it just doesn’t matter.

If you want to replace the whole background, then samething cuz it’s very flexible and you can just do anything you can think of. IOW, it’s some of the very basic trick then you can adapt to just about anything you wish.
I didn’t try it on this image, but I’ve done enough masking to know what masking is capable of. I wouldn’t even bother to try this. I can’t imagine why it was suggested.

I suggested because it’s and advanced technique, and it’s lot more effective than normal masking that most people use.

Your suggestion is the wrong way to use an advanced technique. It doesn’t solve the problem of the color difference in the trousers; it merely substitutes another color of trousers with a color difference.

Well, you get to master the technique first then you can correct or tell me that I am doing the wrong way. Because that is one of the tricks I use quite often, and I use to make $$$$$$

And as I said and won’t mind to repeat it again, you can change the color of trousers to any collor you can name, you can change from pant to dress and my technique wouldn’t careless.

And one of the advanced techniques is try not to make thing more complicate, or anything that requires extra work, extra error, extra time etc. then try not to use it but learn to master the simplest way. And that’s why I mention try not to create the Masked File but using Mask Command instead, try not to use selection but use Layer and Mask Command instead.

You should go into politics. You have the ability to produce a great number of words without the sum of the words meaning anything.

Well, if you look at it that way then be it, and since you are able to correct me and to point out that my technique is wrong then I guess you are qualified to say so.

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections