chrisdesign
Guru
- Messages
- 4,223
- Likes
- 6,236
Excellent result gedstar.
I think this is what the OP is looking for.
I think this is what the OP is looking for.
Photoshop Gurus Forum
Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Edited painting - how can i do this
- Thread starter Ovi Sergiu
- Start date
Neil Felias
New Member
- Messages
- 2
- Likes
- 0
Open the image to Photoshop>Image>Adjustments>Levels... then play around with the Input Levels until you are satisfied.
Tom Mann
Guru
- Messages
- 7,222
- Likes
- 4,343
I would classify the modified versions into one of three categories:
1. Changes that a trained museum conservator-restorer ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservator-restorer)
might make. Their goal is almost always to bring the piece part of the way back to what it looked like before age-related problems became evident (eg, the varnish started cracking and yellowing). Nothing more.
2. Relativelly minor changes that accomplish (1), but also enhance (in the opinion of the PS'er) the original. IMO, skin smoothing, lighting changes, modest increases in saturation and contrast above what the original was likely to have would fall into this category.
3. Major changes to the piece driven by the aesthetic vision and preferences of the PS'er.
I think that the OP's tweaked version falls into this "conservative tweaks " category. In my 1st tweaked version, I also tried to keep within the first guidelines. Yes, my colors are very different than what was first posted, but I've had a couple of personal tours of the conservation labs at the National Gallery of Art here in DC where I've looked through the microscopes, reviewed the chemical analysis of the pigments, etc., and, in many cases, it's astonishing how much the varnish yellows and subdues astonishingly vibrant original colors below.
IMHO, Gedstar's and MikeMc's skin smoothed versions fall into the 2nd category.
Finally, IMHO, my sepia B&W version (ie, application of photo tools to the painting), as well as Chris's facial distortions and Spruce's extreme contrast and saturation boosts all fall into the 3rd category - "personal vision"
IMHO, all the responses in this thread are reasonable responses to the OP's generally stated request to produce "a more clean and live version", but they are all very different, so only the OP can tell us what he really was looking for.
Cheers,
Tom M
1. Changes that a trained museum conservator-restorer ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservator-restorer)
might make. Their goal is almost always to bring the piece part of the way back to what it looked like before age-related problems became evident (eg, the varnish started cracking and yellowing). Nothing more.
2. Relativelly minor changes that accomplish (1), but also enhance (in the opinion of the PS'er) the original. IMO, skin smoothing, lighting changes, modest increases in saturation and contrast above what the original was likely to have would fall into this category.
3. Major changes to the piece driven by the aesthetic vision and preferences of the PS'er.
I think that the OP's tweaked version falls into this "conservative tweaks " category. In my 1st tweaked version, I also tried to keep within the first guidelines. Yes, my colors are very different than what was first posted, but I've had a couple of personal tours of the conservation labs at the National Gallery of Art here in DC where I've looked through the microscopes, reviewed the chemical analysis of the pigments, etc., and, in many cases, it's astonishing how much the varnish yellows and subdues astonishingly vibrant original colors below.
IMHO, Gedstar's and MikeMc's skin smoothed versions fall into the 2nd category.
Finally, IMHO, my sepia B&W version (ie, application of photo tools to the painting), as well as Chris's facial distortions and Spruce's extreme contrast and saturation boosts all fall into the 3rd category - "personal vision"
IMHO, all the responses in this thread are reasonable responses to the OP's generally stated request to produce "a more clean and live version", but they are all very different, so only the OP can tell us what he really was looking for.
Cheers,
Tom M
chrisdesign
Guru
- Messages
- 4,223
- Likes
- 6,236
I look forward to see your version Neil.
It's always interesting to see how other members play around with a challenging task like this one..:mrgreen: