Restoring old pics

Looking for advice on restoring old black and whites, faded color pics, best way to utilize old pics of various sizes and shapes to fill a multi-pic frame to hang on the wall?

The DW has had a few old pics restored by a local photography shop to fill a multi-pic frame, as well as two 8 1/2" x 11" pics for wall hanging in the living room.  Gotta look good.  The two large pics were blown up and retouched.  I guess all pics were retouched for color and clarity.  They look fine to me.  But not knowing anything to compare the quality to, I was wonder if there are any suggestions from those in the know because we now want to fill another 8 place frame with pics from the same era.  The first was of her family.  The new project is of my family.  I have collected 4 shoe boxes of old pics which I am sorting out now.  Various sizes, shapes, and condition.  Going to try to narrow it down to the 8 best pics.

I hope that describes what I am trying to get accomplished.  Suggestions and advice?   

I would suggest you download Picasa and use it. It contains lots of tools that are simple to use for retouching photos. You can also do a Google search on retouching old photos for step by step instructions.

I created a family history book for my family and scanned and corrected over 1500 photos for the book, both color and black and white...I used Photoshop to clean them all up - it was a huge task and took nearly a year to complete, but it was well worth the effort.

Good Luck, if you are only doing a few I would pay a professional to do the job, unless you have experience with a good photo editing software program it is difficult.

Good Luck,

Jim

SeilerBird said:

I would suggest you download Picasa and use it. It contains lots of tools that are simple to use for retouching photos. You can also do a Google search on retouching old photos for step by step instructions.

Click to expand...

Sounds like his photos are not yet digital.

denmac, do you have a scanner?  If so, scan the photos you select and then touch them up with Picasa like SeilerBird suggested or some other image editing app (I use Photoshop Elements).  If no scanner, I think you can have them scanned at Walmart or Staples, etc.  Once your are satisfied, then print them out on photo paper most any size you wish.

My Dad was an avid photographer.  When he died, he had boxes of old photos.  As no one else was interested in sorting through them, and I love doing that kind of thing, I took them.  I sorted through them, kept the ones I wanted and starting scanning them.  I used Picasa to edit them, it does an amazing job.  Can't tell you how many hundreds I ended up with, but it was well worth the effort.  Scan and use Picasa.

SeilerBird said:

I would suggest you download Picasa and use it.

Click to expand...

I am no expert with anything pertaining to photography.  Not even close to a novice.  Though I would love to be able to do this myself, I'm hesitant to even try.

Molaker said:

Sounds like his photos are not yet digital.

Click to expand...

Correct.  For example, some of these pics are in the little "booklets" in yellow Kodak jackets put together by whoever processed them.  The individual pics in these booklets are the black and white, "saw-tooth" edged type pics.  I'm talking pics of 40-50 years plus in age.

Do I have a scanner?  Yes.  Do I think I know how to use it to the extent you all are suggesting?  I'm not sure.  :-\  I have no experience in this sort of thing at all.  And even though we are only talking about a finished product of 8 pics, I would usually just pay a pro to do it.  I still may do so.  I also would love the honor and satisfaction of doing this myself.  A totally new thing for me to tackle.   

 

The nice thing about trying it yourself first is that you can't screw things up. All edits are temporary until you save it as a new file. Just don't over write the original or else you have to create a new original. It's not hard.

SeilerBird said:

The nice thing about trying it yourself first is that you can't screw things up. All edits are temporary until you save it as a new file. Just don't over write the original or else you have to create a new original. It's not hard.

Click to expand...

And the hard copy originals are still right there, just like new (or in this case, old).

We had a photo taken when we were dating that had faded from light over the years.  Jerry scanned it and put it into the "lesser" Photo Shop (there's a very expensive version).  We were amazed that he was able to make the sky blue like it was originally.  We still have the original, but have the new and now more realistic version in the frame.  If the newer fades we can just print out another one.  Neat!  Some of the photo programs are so easy to use because they have automatic settings if you want to use them.  I wanted to send one to my sister that Jerry took in Arches N.P.  The canyon walls were so dark that I didn't think she'd be able to see them because of retinopathy.  He lightened the shadow and it turned out great so she could see the rock walls.  Who knows.  Maybe you'll enjoy doing it so much you'll find a new hobby.  Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

ArdraF

I have been using Picasa for quite a few years and really like it for working with old photos. It is pretty simple to use but then again, there are many features in Picasa that I still don't know how to use. I have done some old pics taken in the 30's and 40's that came out good. Give it a try because as said above you really can't screw up what you have.

In case anyone is wondering I will explain the two versions of Photoshop. The original version of Photoshop was released in 1990 for Apple only. It was a graphics arts program that allowed the user to make or modify any graphics you could think up. Then in the 1990s digital cameras started being sold so Photoshop was modified to allow it to accept and modify digital photographs. As the digital photography field expanded so did Photoshop and it's abilities. Currently Photoshop is on version CS6 and costs $700.

There is also a version of Photoshop called Photoshop Elements first released in 2001. It is a dumbed down version of Photoshop that costs 1/10th the price and has 1/100th of the features of Photoshop. It is designed for someone who wants the power of Photoshop without the price. Currently they are on version 12 of Elements and it costs $70. It is a much better solution for 99% of the digital camera users.

Then there is Lightroom, also made by Adobe. It was first released in 2006. It is a digital camera photo editing program built from the ground up by professional photographers for professional photographers and very serious amateurs. It is on version 5 and costs about $100. If you take a lot of images then Lightroom is the best solution.

There are plenty of other great image editing programs out there but the nice thing about Photoshop and Lightroom is that both of them have many free tutorials on the web to get you started.

One tip, zoom in 200 percent or more.  The area to repaired becomes very large, neater repairs can be done to the edges.  When you go back to normal size the repair will be seamless.

In my opinion Photoshop has a pretty steep learning curve.  Whether photographers like it or not the future is Photoshop CC (Creative Cloud.)  This means that consumers pay a subscription fee for the software or a package of software programs they want to use.  Since I already own copies of Photoshop Cs5 and Cs6 I haven't spent much time looking into Photoshop CC but I think you can get a free trial.  Attached is a link if you want to research it more.  http://www.adobe.com/downloads.html.  Eventually I will probably end up switching over to Photoshop CC.

I subscribe to Lynda.com which has training on quite a few subjects.  One of the subjects is Scanning and Restoring Photos.  The link is  http://www.lynda.com/sdk/Photoshop-Elements-9-tutorials/scanning-and-restoring-photos/69525-2.html.

Last but not least is copyright infringement.  I am working on a degree in professional portrait photography.  One of my models asked me to restore some photos of his parents wedding pictures for their upcoming  25th wedding anniversary.  I mentioned this to one of my professors.  The first thing he asked me was if I have the original photographer's permission.  No I don't have permission so I am not taking on the project.  Most people don't realize that they don't own the copyrights for the pictures taken of them unless they have a written release from the photographer (whether the person taking the photo was professional or not.) Professional photographers usually keep the copyright but might allow printing or reuse/licensing that is spelled out in the terms and conditions of a written agreement.  The copyright laws are complicated (i.e. fair use, etc.) but a reputable photo restorer should question whether you have the right to duplicate or restore the images. 

PS:  I'm just a professional photography student and not an attorney.

I might as well add a reference here to The Gimp, that is, GNU Image Manipulation Program. It is free in both senses of the word, that is monetary and freedom. It also has quite a learning curve, but it doesn't cost $700, or even $70, either. I use it sometimes, and I also use ACDSee, an excellent image management program (payware, though), which allows you to sort through pictures kind of like a lightbox, do slideshows (either within the program or to produce a standalone show), do mild retouching, find duplicate files (not just duplicate file names), annotate files, and a lot more.

Whether photographers like it or not the future is Photoshop CC (Creative Cloud.)

Click to expand...

I keep hearing that the "cloud" is the future, but while a lot of companies like the idea (they can make more money, a continuing revenue stream), I suspect most consumers (certainly ones like me) are less enamored with the idea. The risk of everything being lost (it's happened more than once), "hackers" (I hate that use of the word) breaking in, and the ongoing cost all tend to steer me away from that sort of thing.

I have been using the cloud extensively for the last few years and I could not be happier. I no longer have to buy a monster computer, I can get by with a Chromebook. Much cheaper, no viruses, easier to use and a wonderful operating system.

Larry,

I want to clarify that lots of different programs use the term cloud.  I'm referring to Adobe's "Creative Cloud" and more specifically Photoshop CC.  if I want to use any of the new Photoshop features being developed I will have to subscribe. 

I back up my images on a hard drive so I'm not too concerned about losing images except through my own error or laxness.  I am more concerned with backwards compatibility if I start using Photoshop Creative Cloud and then drop the service and try to go back to Photoshop Cs6.  I haven't done enough research to understand how that will affect images I edited in PS CC.  I am also more concerned about people using my images without my permission or without paying for them.  I think this is more a byproduct of the web and people not understanding and/or abusing copyrights. 

It's interesting that many of the professional photographers I know said they would never switch to Photoshop CC and six months later are now subscribing. It's not just Photoshop that is being affected.  Adobe Creative Cloud also includes InDesign, Illustrator, and other creative software programs for web designers, graphic designers, video producers .... 

The impact is huge and the price is megabucks.  Minnesota schools are currently negotiating with Adobe about the ongoing cost of Adobe Creative Cloud for the classrooms, students, and instructors.  Eventually an agreement will be reached, the schools will switch to CC,  then students will switch to CC, and then employers will start hiring graduates with more CC skills.  Some say other players will step up to compete.  I'm not so sure.
Edit: Reduce white space.

Seilerbird,

As you know Photoshop is a monster program.  I also use Lightroom 5 and several other specialty editing software programs and plugins.  These were all designed to play nicely together but I don't think I can downsize my computer needs if I switch to Photoshop CC.  I had my computer specifically built to handle all these program.

Right now there are lots of myths about Adobe's CC.  If I remember correctly the applications are still downloaded to the hard drive on your computer.  They can be used off line so to speak.  This might not be the case with other "cloud" applications but I think it is true with Adobe's Creative Cloud.  Attached is a short video about the top 5 myths regarding Adobe CC. 

http://tv.adobe.com/watch/inside-creative-cloud/the-myths-of-adobe-creative-cloud/

Yes Photoshop is a monster program and that is why I never recommend it to anyone. It is a dinosaur unless you are going to do some pretty sophisticated graphics work. Anyhow, I am not recommending any program, I am just explaining the differences in the different versions of Photoshop.

I want to clarify that lots of different programs use the term cloud.  I'm referring to Adobe's "Creative Cloud" and more specifically Photoshop CC.  if I want to use any of the new Photoshop features being developed I will have to subscribe. 

Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification. I'll stick with the Gimp, however (I don't need that "new" stuff anyway -- I don't use 10% of what's available to me now). I'm extremely distrustful of online stuff, and I see no reason (for my use, anyway) to pay ongoing fees for software, web storage, etc.

Absolutely understandable.  Since I'm working toward degree in professional photography my needs are very different.  Cheers.