|
|
"This
picture of my grandfather was taken in 1966, at the age of 80. He was
still working then. He died 100 days before his 100th birthday, a truly
special man. I want to enlarge it and have it framed, to hang it on my
wall. Unfortunately, the enlarged image is full of tiny bubbles."
Attila S.
|
|
|
Well,
the multitude of flecks, looking like snowfall, is really annoying. It
won't be difficult to remove, though, as the picture itself contains
rather few details. It is quite rough and aquarel-like. Thus, even a
strong noise filtering operation could not do it much harm, so we'll
take it on bravely. As you may remember, noise filtering has the
definite disadvantage of removing finer details from the picture,
together with noise. Now this danger won't loom around. There's a fair
chance to make the snowfall vanish.
A
few larger blots also catch the eye, and some smaller cracks, as well
as the fragmented picture edges. They, won't present an issue either.
|
|
|
When dealing with black-and-white images, I always start with Image/Adjustments/Desaturate,
as there's no need for the color veil left by the scanner or the
camera. It was not particularly annoying by this photo, but still, you
could spot a slight yellowish discoloration.
From earlier articles, you may remember the Filter/Noise/Dust&Scratches
filter. It takes on quite neatly all kinds of damaging spots and
lines, not just dust and scratches. It will be a perfect tool for this
problem, too. I have used a Radius value of 3, which is appropriate to "snowflakes" of such a size. A value of 2 still left a few grains on the photo, while 4 already did too much blurring. Keep an eye on the preview area and toggle Preview
to switch between the original and filtered image all the time to
determine the ideal setting. Every photo, every speck of dust or line
of scratch can require a different setting. This is absolutely up to
the editing person. Setting Threshold properly is
equally important. Lower values produce strong filtering and blur the
finer details, as mentioned above. On the other hand, using higher
values leads to preserving more details, and, alongside them, more of
the noise. Once again, adjust the setting in small steps and keep
checking the result constantly by toggling the preview. Consider how
much of the details are gone and to what extent are the snowflakes
eliminated? For this photo, a value of 8 looked good.
As
this is an old paper photo, you might do well to preserve the analogue
look and feel. You don't have to filter everything totally smooth.
Paper photos look better and more natural, if there is some graininess
left. Once you have the picture enlarged once again onto paper, it will
not be discernible anyway. Of course, it is my personal opinion. As
this is a portrait, it doesn't look bad even when filtered to softness.
Later we'll return to this issue again as it won't be late to do this
then.
|
|
The
removal of fragmented picture edges is really simple. I simply cropped
the photo so that the jagged edges fell off. There were ones intruding
a bit further inward. I used Healing Brush (press J) and Clone Stamp (press S) interchanged to remove them. ALT+click
a healthy area, and simply clone it over the damaged one. This is also
the way to deal with the larger blot at the neck of the shirt, as well
as other smaller defects.
|
|
|
To remove the big blot at the right, I used the Patch Tool. (Press J to activate it.) It is found in the same place on the toolbar as Healing Brush,
but you have to hold the mouse button pressed over the button. You can
use this tool to clone the texture of a larger area to another, just
like such a blot. I located a larger, unharmed area on the left, being
slightly larger than the damaged one, and simply dragged it over to the
other side.
Smaller lightness defects and texture repetitions were once again removed using Clone Stamp.
|
|
As a last touch, I thought it would do good to emphasize the eyes a bit.
Here's a useful tip on how to do it.
The
final picture will be of acceptable quality when enlarged to about
10x15 cm (4"x6"). Sharpening is hopeless, it would only make fragment
details fall apart, i.e., deteriorate image quality.
|
|
original / modified / filtered even more
|
As
I had a little devil whispering into my ear, I made a second version,
getting rid of that analogue feel. Decide for yourself which one you
like better.
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment