Check out Astronomical Photography Forum section of our forum.
Victoria with crappy background ... need help.
Jan 21, 2019 11:25:18 #
DIRTY HARRY
Loc: Hartland, Michigan
I have some negative of Victoria that I'm not happy with the background and am having trouble correcting the problem. About all I know how to use is the clone and heal tool and find this leaves a very blotchy background and it's difficult to get close enough to the subject to make it look good. Any direction or suggestions that could help me out would be very much appreciated. There's go to be a better way. Thanks.
Jan 21, 2019 11:38:31 #
This is not bad. I assume you have a selection of the background saved. If so I would try flooding the bkg area with a fill of 50% of a similar gray tone and let some of the blotchy tone show through. Then add about a 4% Uniform monochromatic noise to the bkg area to harmonize it with the figure. Then you could vignette the background and lighten its center around where the light shows thru the fabric she is holding. Then it should be fine.
You need to fix the lower legs area or crop that off too.
You need to fix the lower legs area or crop that off too.
Jan 21, 2019 11:41:23 #
DIRTY HARRY
Loc: Hartland, Michigan
And there's the problem ... I'm not sure what you said , let alone who to do it. Sorry.
Fotoartist wrote:
This is not bad. I assume you have a selection of the background saved. If so I would try adding a fill of 50% of a similar gray tone from the bkg there and let some of the blotchy tone show through. Then I would add about a 4% Uniform monochromatic noise to the bkg area. You can always vignette the background and lighten its center around where the light shows thru the fabric she is holding. Then it should be fine.
You need to fix the lower legs area or crop that off too.
You need to fix the lower legs area or crop that off too.
Check out Printers and Color Printing Forum section of our forum.
Jan 21, 2019 12:13:22 #
What I was suggesting takes a bit of post processing finessing learned from experience. It looked like you were getting there from your first effort.
Jan 21, 2019 13:37:32 #
I’m going to suggest something here, and I apologize in advance if this offends anyone; that is sincerely not my attention.
I’ve looked at the downloads and this appears to be an old (40 years, 50 years, or could even be older than me!) film photograph that has subsequently been scanned for purposes of additional processing. That processing is centered around the “fixing of a problem”; the depth of field used didn’t separate the beautiful model from a somewhat boring / distracting background.
At this point, I would suggest appreciating the photograph for what it is, and the memories it brings. While much more experienced Forum SME’s than me can suggest many ways in which that background problem could be minimized, the question has to be asked; is all that work going to really add artistic value to the original image?
If the model and photographer were with me, in a workshop moment, I would suggest several changes to the planning and execution of the next images. I would never advocate trying to fix this image in post-processing. Unfortunately, my Time Machine is still in Alpha Test phase, and I find I can appreciate the decades of history represented in this image.
Again, just my perspective (I’m often wrong!), but I encourage viewing the photograph as it is, rather than trying to fix a historical problem with modern techniques.
I’ve looked at the downloads and this appears to be an old (40 years, 50 years, or could even be older than me!) film photograph that has subsequently been scanned for purposes of additional processing. That processing is centered around the “fixing of a problem”; the depth of field used didn’t separate the beautiful model from a somewhat boring / distracting background.
At this point, I would suggest appreciating the photograph for what it is, and the memories it brings. While much more experienced Forum SME’s than me can suggest many ways in which that background problem could be minimized, the question has to be asked; is all that work going to really add artistic value to the original image?
If the model and photographer were with me, in a workshop moment, I would suggest several changes to the planning and execution of the next images. I would never advocate trying to fix this image in post-processing. Unfortunately, my Time Machine is still in Alpha Test phase, and I find I can appreciate the decades of history represented in this image.
Again, just my perspective (I’m often wrong!), but I encourage viewing the photograph as it is, rather than trying to fix a historical problem with modern techniques.
Jan 21, 2019 14:29:12 #
Jan 21, 2019 14:48:03 #
RogStrix
Loc: UK
Quick effort using the free online cut out tool at remove.bg - might need a bit of tweaking...
Check out Landscape Photography section of our forum.
Jan 21, 2019 16:19:41 #
DIRTY HARRY
Loc: Hartland, Michigan
Be my guest...
RogStrix wrote:
Are you just after a plain background? I can have a go tomorrow if that's ok?
Jan 21, 2019 16:27:57 #
DIRTY HARRY
Loc: Hartland, Michigan
Might all be true but it's all I have. These were taken the summer of 1972 with all the skill and experience I had at the time (not a lot of eiyher)and since Boy ran off with my "Wayback Machine" I can't take my current technology back and re-shoot these photos ... and she might not be in the mood this time. Just trying to the best I can with what I have.
BB4A wrote:
I’m going to suggest something here, and I apologi... (show quote)
Jan 21, 2019 23:46:47 #
Think I agree with BB4A in that when I look at the original I see an "era" photo, dated by the curtains, pubic hair, long straight blond hair, etc. but it also has a wonderful "girl-next-door" quality with her possibly having just come out of the shower, maybe thinking of getting ready for a date, etc. The "towel" blocking the back light thru the door is actually masterful but cover up the background and in my humble opinion you have a poorly scanned, kind of flat, no purpose photo. Hope you understand this is a positive post.
Jan 22, 2019 11:12:48 #
Check out People Photography section of our forum.
Jan 22, 2019 20:24:19 #
DIRTY HARRY wrote:
So, Is this better? I think you might be right.
Yes, personally like that one although a still flat and you know you are starting with a pretty poor scan so hard to do much. While having a sandwich I spent 2-3 minutes trying to bring out more clarity & definition but then legs get worse. Here was result before deleting. Anyway, interesting era shot - thanks.
Jan 22, 2019 20:32:43 #
DIRTY HARRY
Loc: Hartland, Michigan
So you threw a sepia tone on it? Hope your sandwich didn't get cold.
Stardust wrote:
Yes, personally like that one although a still flat and you know you are starting with a pretty poor scan so hard to do much. While having a sandwich I spent 2-3 minutes trying to bring out more clarity & definition but then legs get worse. Here was result before deleting. Anyway, interesting era shot - thanks.
Jan 22, 2019 20:51:49 #
DIRTY HARRY wrote:
Yes, I often like to take a look at a little sepia (10% in your photo) on more flat B&W to see if it helps. Per my tag line "I shoot for my own pleasure" and I PP the same way. <grin>So you threw a sepia tone on it? Hope your sandwich didn't get cold.
The sandwich was just cold turkey, cheese & mayo... although the toast did get a little cold. The things we do for our craft!!!
Jan 23, 2019 09:06:11 #
DIRTY HARRY
Loc: Hartland, Michigan
Took me longer to download photo into program then to add sepia... lacking ego isn't one of your problems. Lets see some of you stuff.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Software and Computer Support for Photographers section of our forum.