So I’m having a professional scan some photos. I was wondering if you guys could give me the following opinions. The left is the original, right is retouched.
How do the colors look in the retouched versions? If there’s too much blue, or too much this or that color, or too much or too little saturation, tell me; and also tell me what to tell him
Are any askew? Every photo I have scanned, I plan on having reprinted for family.
They look great to me. I need to add this skill to my own self.
I do a lot of this myself. Often from originals that are from the early 1900’s. They are usually not in color though as it hadn’t been invented yet.
They look pretty good to me. The color saturation is often a choice by the person doing the restoration. And it will look different on various pc monitors unless they have been calibrated.
If you are supplied the digital files you can make additional color changes when new prints are made.
I’m not an absolute authority on scanning and restoration, but do a lot of professional retouching. My guess is that the restorer adjusted the color until things known to be white looked white. For the pictures with a border, the color was adjusted till the border was close to white.
Theoretically, when the white is right then the other colors are close to being restored to their original hue. After that, a restorer can adjust the brightness, the levels, the curves, maybe even individual RGB channels.
Overall, the pictures look good.
All in all they look very good. Looks like they raised the color saturation evenly, as all colors are improved without any dropping off. In the last photo, you do lose all detail in the shadow of the porch.
Dennis
FWIW the retouched police photos have a distinct blue push, compared to the same scenes white-balanced in Gimp. Do you know if the uniforms they wore were obviously blue? If so, then the retouched photos are probably the more accurate.