Land's End Photo

Tony Cooper

unread,

May 10, 2022, 7:33:11 PM5/10/22

to

David Brooks wrote:

This one is rather worse for wear! I can't recall how it got into such
a
state! https://ibb.co/2F0zNVp

Couldn't help taking a crack at it. I cleaned up the sky and brought
in a little color in the sky. The sky shouldn't compete with the
figures, so I went for just a little color. Cloned out a number of
problems in the figures, but didn't work on the faces. Too little to
work with.

Cleaned up the yellow in the sign. Ran it through a High Pass
filter/Overlay. Removed the "annotation" because viewers don't care
what was done.

Anytime you're working with scans of old photos, the quality of the
finished job will depend on the quality of the scan. This was a poor
scan to begin with.

This is my effort at repair:

https://folio.ink/dbzQAR
--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.
--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

nospam

unread,

May 10, 2022, 7:51:36 PM5/10/22

to

In article <o2tl7ht1n8vq7obg0...@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper

<tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:

> --
>
> Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida
>
> I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.
> --
>
> Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida
>
> I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

fix your newsreader. fix your newsreader.

David Taylor

unread,

May 11, 2022, 1:52:35 AM5/11/22

to

On 11/05/2022 00:33, Tony Cooper wrote:
> This is my effort at repair:
>
> https://folio.ink/dbzQAR

It's a pity that the repaired photo is so much smaller than the original, and
has lost significant detail as a result. Otherwise, very nice.

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

David Brooks

unread,

May 11, 2022, 6:20:17 PM5/11/22

to

On 11/05/2022 00:33, Tony Cooper wrote:

> David Brooks wrote:
>
> This one is rather worse for wear! I can't recall how it got into such
> a
> state! https://ibb.co/2F0zNVp
>
>
> Couldn't help taking a crack at it. I cleaned up the sky and brought
> in a little color in the sky. The sky shouldn't compete with the
> figures, so I went for just a little color. Cloned out a number of
> problems in the figures, but didn't work on the faces. Too little to
> work with.
>
> Cleaned up the yellow in the sign. Ran it through a High Pass
> filter/Overlay. Removed the "annotation" because viewers don't care
> what was done.
>
> Anytime you're working with scans of old photos, the quality of the
> finished job will depend on the quality of the scan. This was a poor
> scan to begin with.
>
> This is my effort at repair:
>
> https://folio.ink/dbzQAR

You are a bit of a star, Tony! ⭐️

Very many thanks. :-D

Tony Cooper

unread,

May 11, 2022, 11:52:17 PM5/11/22

to

>You are a bit of a star, Tony! ??
>
>Very many thanks. :-D

I didn't pay attention to the size, and the image I downloaded is only
567 x 800 at 72 ppi. That's OK for web viewing, but if you want it at
4" x 6" at 300 ppi for printing if that's the desired use here it is:

https://folio.ink/WjnN7m

David Taylor

unread,

May 12, 2022, 5:00:09 AM5/12/22

to

On 12/05/2022 04:52, Tony Cooper wrote:
> I didn't pay attention to the size, and the image I downloaded is only
> 567 x 800 at 72 ppi. That's OK for web viewing, but if you want it at
> 4" x 6" at 300 ppi for printing if that's the desired use here it is:
>
> https://folio.ink/WjnN7m

Thanks, Tony.

David Brooks

unread,

May 12, 2022, 10:54:26 AM5/12/22

to

On 12/05/2022 04:52, Tony Cooper wrote:

That's very kind.

Thank you, Tony. 🙂

Magani

unread,

May 13, 2022, 7:40:01 PM5/13/22

to

I've had a modicum of success enlarging small photos with Topaz Labs' Gigapixel-AI. Might be worth a look if you want it bigger without it going all pixilated? I believe they have a free trial but I'm not sure what restrictions they have on that version.

Disclaimer: No connection; just a happy user. Also, the blurb implies miracles, but the results are still not too bad.

Cheers,
Magani