"I tried to send this question to Phos, but the email came back…"
Well, I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I’m pretty sure nobody heremyself includedwants to be receiving unsolicited emails with images and requests for help. Besides, I bounce emails I’m not expecting, anyway.
The way the forum works best is when questions and answers are conducted within the forum, that way everyone who visits will benefit.
What you might want to do is upload whatever you were going to send me to <
http://www.pixentral.com>.
When your uploaded image is displayed scroll down and copy ALL of the code in the box designated HTML, then paste it in a reply here.
Ignore the "FORUM" code below your image Use that for other forums which will only accept proprietary markup code formatting.
Phos,
Thanks you for you suggestion. However, I just cannot put (even a partial) picture of the lady up on the internet (www.pixentral.com). I had hoped someone would help me out privately, but if that is not the case, so be it. I will continue to try to see how to do it on my own. But, I will not compromise this individual with (at the risk of repeating, even a partial picture) on the internet.
Thanks anyway.
Bob
First, only those who look at it here will see it, and you can crop it to make it unrecognizable.
Besides, nobody cares who it is, whether celebrity or humped over old crone from next door.
original image reduced from 14.4 x 10.8 (180ppi) to 300 bbp 8.64 x 6.48 and did not use resample
Recroped to sanitize. new demisions are .63 x 2.18 at 300 ppi
Now I have to figure out how to get up to pixcentral
<
http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1ushR1VIFjOvHuVatW NVdKxv8SSZjL1>
I clicked on this url and it went to the picture… I just hope I have not compromised someones confidentialityl… I am trusting you guys when you say this is save.
Can you help me make this picture (expecially the face clearer).
Bob
I know her and she is gonna be pissed. seriously a larger version cropped something like michael posted would help. it looks like there are so many jpg artifacts,its hard to tell whats going on there.
other than giving you the origial picture from the camera, I dont know what I can do to make it easier for you. But that being said I would like to at least erase some of her facial features. Would that make it easier to help me?
The image you posted suffers from severe JPEG artifacts, almost as though it were from a cellphone camera. Somehow, the sample must have been overcompressed. That’s part of the problem, but the image is also underexposed, and has a pretty large amount of noise in addition to the JPEG artifacts. There’s not much we can do without a better sample — unless the JPEG artifacts are there in the original, which would be unlikely if you have an original image file of about 6 megapixels, which appears to be the case from the dimensions you list.
Here’s what I suggest: Without doing any resampling, try cropping a piece that is several hundred pixels wide from the face and neck area (sort of like my last post). Use Save for Web to save it as a JPEG with a Very High or Maximum quality level, then put it up on Pixentral.com, and copy the HTML code from the box and paste it here.
WHERE ARE YOUR SENSIBILITIES, MAN!!!???
To HELL with divulging the identity of the woman, WHY would you not decide the privacy of the children in the photo was more important.
Sheesh.
I’m outta here.
Phos,
you are abssoultly right… i didnt realize it until it was posted
I knew this was a bad idea… is there anyway I can delete the photo from pixcentral? Bob
Maybe you can delete them, I don’t know for sure.
But if you email Carlo Eugster (owner of Pixentral) you should be able to get him to do it.
I dont think you delete off pixentral,but at least it appears you did not make it public on the pixentral site. dont go getting all crazy over this. underexposure on the original ,may be your problem, plus your subject only compromises a tiny fragment of the frame, meaning there are only so many pixels to create her image in that area. if you want only her,crop tighter on the shot to fill the frame when you shoot it.
I already requested Carlos to delete this. And to think, I did not want to subject anyone to the web and this happens……
You can not imagning how I feel right now…especially after some comment that were made about not to worry….(that I dont want to repeat)!
Donald,
I truly appreicate your help. I have tried to take the origianl picture, crop only her, and then reduce the image to 300ppi… but her face still looked blotchy and hence that is why I came to you all.
Okay, I see that you’ve given us the best you can, and this is a small underexposed segment of an otherwise balanced image. The subject’s image has severe JPEG artifacts and noise, but all hope is not lost. I took the lower face and neck area, then tried two alternative treatments: (a) Filters > Noise > Median, set to 1 px, and (b) Filters > Noise > Reduce Noise, with a fairly high amount of customized correction. I then applied a curves adjustment layer to improve the exposures of the original and both treatments. Here is a matrix showing the original and corrected exposures of all three, along with the detailed settings used in the Reduce Noise filter, which looks like the way to go.
<
http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1pLmcw6VcjcmNTOSWL gAIGQkeFEQ>
I did this in the Beta of PS CS3, but CS2 should perform about the same.
Nice job michael. that only proves i have to learn more when i get cs3. it looks great,but it will be countless hours learning the newest stuff. very clear info as well.
Michael,
thanks ever so much. I am going to try the same technique to the origianl photo. It is 11:26pm here and I have to retire for the night but rest assured tomorrow I will be plugging away.
Obvisouly, I have to learn how to set up a camera first before taking more pictures (and I thought Auto solved all problems).
Your comment about a small underexposed segement of an overall balance image, is a little confusing to me but that is another subject I will have to at least learn more about. the over compressed comments will have to be investigated also.
Anyway, thanks once again and rest assured I will get back to you with my humble attempts to produce 1/2 of the quality you produced with this horrible attempt at picture taking.
BOb
Make sure that your camera options are set to save images with the highest quality level you can, typically "Fine" or something like that.
Michael,
Unbelievable…how you came up with the parameters for the noise is beyond me and shows how much one has to learn. I am now looking for tutorials on noise filters and while I am at it I probably need a Dummys book on how to take a decent picture.
Thanks Michael
Bob
Michael,
Rereading (for the 10th time), it looks as if you did this:
Option 1. Original image + curve
Option 2. Original image + noise median 1 plus curve
Option 3. Original image + custom advance noise reduction plus curve
and you are saying option 3 is the way to go. is that correct?
Yes, option 3 — noise reduction filter plus curve. I did the noise reduction first, then applied the curve as an adjustment layer. As to how I found the settings, the answer is trial and error. Try moving a slider up and down to see what happens. Then try the next. Go back to the first. Etc. That’s pretty much what one needs to do with most filters, because every image is different. You may find that a different combination works better for you.
You may also want to use the filter on a copied layer, and afterwards use a layer mask to isolate its effects if necessary.
If you want to take this a little further…
In addition to Michael’s work, I’d adjust the curves a bit more with the white and black point tools (this may not be necessary; hard to tell on a third generation print on the net). Also maybe apply a slight gaussian blur to a selection of her face to smooth out the wrinkles a bit.
Art
Art,
Thanks for your suggestions. I will make sure to tell her about what you said on the gaussian blur for her wrinkles. Whoooow be you. I can just see her demanding your email address and the subsequent email to you ha ha.