touch up a photo?

  • Thread starter Thread starter trapper
  • Start date Start date
Create a Post
T

trapper

Guest
I know that I know that I saw somewhere some inks for photo touch up..Anyone know where to get this product or any information on how to do it?
HAd a job come in to the shop requiring such services. I thought that seeing how Diane was an artist we should look into this?
 
The Frame Works does it. We charge wholesale clients $40/hour. We do excellent work, if I may say so. We print photos on an Epson 7800 with photo black K3 inkset, currently the state of the art in the industry. Turn around time is usually less than a week. We can scan, repair and print. We also have excellent color restoration software.

Warren
 
Marshall's is the retouching dye company. I think you can find them by asking the computer to find Marshall's Photo Dyes. I believe Michael's also carries Marshall's dyes, but only in the black/sepia tones, not the colors.
I've used them for years. My very first job I ever had, in high school, was photo retouching for a lg. studio that did school photos, fire dept, police dept, etc. I still have the brush I used, about 3 hairs, and the original bottles of the dyes. They last a long time if you keep them sealed, and then if they do dry up, you just add water.
The retouching dyes, come in oil, for "colorizing" photos. I wouldn't use that, but the "ink" dyes are for regular photos, touching up spots, etc. Practice, practice practice on your own things before you try a customer's, or pass it on to someone who's qualified. The latter might be my recommendation, but if Diane is an artist, she might have the "touch". It requires a light hand and good eyes, you dot-dot-dot, as in putting pixels and you have to look very closely. A green area might require dotting with red and yellow and blue inks. It isn't as easy as you might think.I'm probably the only person in town who does this, and get referrals fom the photo studios, etc. If you can master it, it's rewarding. Many things can be done via computer, but once in awhile it can't, as in the antique convex oval photos, or just a few minor spots that don't warrant the expense of computering.
Practice, practice, practice.
 
Thankyou Val...YEs marshal is who I was thinking of..I must have seen it on the computer somewhere.
This is not something I would try myself..I can't even draw a line with a ruler..ha!
As for the com0puter touch up that we do and are probalby the second best in the nation..you guys all being the first of course :)
Some things can't be done on a computer is right...Ex. in point a photo taken at a studio has the photographers comapny name down in the corner with raised letters. I don't know of any csoftware that can do this by copying the image..great job at copying..can't tell it was a copy, except the letters are not raised..
 
If it is color, then Marshall; if it is black and white, then SpotTone.

You can mix various SpotTone dyes to match the overall tone of your image - blue black, neutral black, warm black, sepia, etc.
 
What exactly needs touching up? And if it was a professionally done photo, why wasn't it touched up by the photographer before it was given to the customer? Or is it damage that occured after the photo left the studio?

I've been a retoucher for 17 years, both on prints and negatives and now with the computer. There used to be several brands of dyes (Marshals, Veronica Cass, etc.) but I don't know if any are still available.

However, if it is damage to the photo and the emulsion is scratched to the point that the base paper is showing, dyes will not work to repair it. They just wick into the paper underneath and disappear (trust me, I've tried it). Also, dyes will only work to correct problems that are lighter than the surrounding area-such as glass glare. If the area is darker, like a blemish, it would have to be removed on the negative or by air brushing or by computer. I've had some success with minor scratches using grease pencils to fill the scratch and then buffing them down with cotton, but only on minor scratches. Anything bigger, and it's probably best just to get the picture reprinted.
 
Hi AnneL; Funny cuz we were just having a heated discussion about the emulsion of prints and if they could be worked or not..I said yes and used conservationists as an example..she says no and quotes from others..Conclusion is that there are no rights and wrongs to this busn. Some say yes others say no. It appears to me that it can be a yes if you decide to do it and it can be a no if you decide you can't. It seems to be a busn wehre there are no rules set in stone, only guide lines. Good gguide lines but..! Your logic sounds right on to me however and for now that is where I am at. But somehow always in the back of my mind I will wonder.
The picture was damaged after it wes received. Today I got in a photo that was over 80 years old.
It was great and wonderful to hear the story behind it, but I was afarid of it being so old..It needed touching up badly, but somehow that was what made the charm it has. I can imagine a story line going along with each scratch and nic. I think back then they had to pull the blanket over their head and shoot it. I know it wasn't done with any ole digital camera..ha!
I haven't a clue what kind of chemicals were used back then and what kind of tones were used. SO I did not touch this one up. Just fixed the frame. Not sure how I owuld have re-touched it..wonder if those spot pens would have worked.???
thanks for the post..
 
I have a thory about touching up..remember its only a theory and probably laughable..
if somehow the paint or dye in the surrounding area could me moved ( like a car when using a grit..forgot what its called ) Loosen the paint up just around the immediate area and drag it over into the damaged area...why not?
2: use the same dye that was used on the original to touch up with??
I haven't a clue how to identify the dye..but seems to me that once you have it then your applying the same colors back on to the print..
I am really interested in this conservation as of late..Just seems like one of those "wow" type of things to me. I love " WOW"!
 
I used to do photo re-touching for a photo shop before I began framing.

I did some negative work, and of course print work. The marshall dyes are good - but you should make sure to use a very good quality brush - the smallest point you can find, a very light touch, and to apply light layers and let them dry between coats. If you get the dye on an area that is not damaged you'll end up with a dark ring around the problem area!

If the emulsion is scratched you can fix it with the methods mentioned above, or you can also spray it with a toothed coating and apply pencils to it. This is good for things like acne blemishes (mild ones) or things like the removal of small hairs, etc. It can take several coats of spray which can be a problem if you don't have a proper spray booth. For larger or darker areas you're best off to touch the negative first then fill it back in.

There is no way I would attempt an "old" photo. Suggest they get copies made unless you are a restoration God!!
 
BTW I would suggest Warren's solution. Touching up on the original is iffy at best, disatrous (sp) at worst.
Warren does EXCELLENT work and I highly reccomend him (although he is a little far from Alaska)
However you proceed, I'd scan the original first so you have something to go back to in the event of disaster.

Tony
 
Originally posted by trapper:
I have a thory about touching up..remember its only a theory and probably laughable..
if somehow the paint or dye in the surrounding area could me moved ( like a car when using a grit..forgot what its called ) Loosen the paint up just around the immediate area and drag it over into the damaged area...why not?
2: use the same dye that was used on the original to touch up with??
I haven't a clue how to identify the dye..but seems to me that once you have it then your applying the same colors back on to the print..
I am really interested in this conservation as of late..Just seems like one of those "wow" type of things to me. I love " WOW"!
Click to expand...
Yikes! You should NEVER try to remove artwork from a photo! The emulsion is very thin and delicate, therefore it is easily damaged. It isn't as simple as loosening paint or dye up, the paint or dye soaks in and gets bonded to the emulsion. Sometimes can get dye off by placing a cotton ball dampened with distilled water on it, but you do not want to rub the area with anything as you will only damage the emulsion. I wouldn't even attempt paint. I would leave that to an art conservator who knows what they are doing.

As far as using the same dye, it really doesn't matter if you scratched the emulsion through to the paper. Dye will just wick into the paper under the emulsion and cause more problems. That's why you either need to use a solid media or have a new photo made. Having a new photo made if possible is probably the best option. It will always be less time consumeing and look better than any attempted repair, no matter how good the artist.

And to further complicate things, professional photos are often coated with lacquer after the artwork is done on them. Once they have been lacquered, there is no way to remove or touch up the artwork without removing the lacquer or putting on another coat of retouch lacquer to work on. And for that to look good, you need to practice getting an even coat and you really should have a proper spray booth to do it in. The stuff is toxic!

You said the picture was damaged after it was received. Do you mean after the customer received it from the photographer or after you received it from the customer? If it was damaged by your shop, then it is your resposiblity to fess up and pay for a replacement.

I don't mean to be so harsh here, but I have worked on literally thousands of photos over the years and unless you know what you are doing, you can wreck them real quick.

(By the way, the best way to lift up the "paint" in a section of a photo and move it to another area is with the patch tool in Photoshop.)
 
Originally posted by trapper:
Today I got in a photo that was over 80 years old.
It was great and wonderful to hear the story behind it, but I was afarid of it being so old..It needed touching up badly, but somehow that was what made the charm it has. I can imagine a story line going along with each scratch and nic. I think back then they had to pull the blanket over their head and shoot it. I know it wasn't done with any ole digital camera..ha!
I haven't a clue what kind of chemicals were used back then and what kind of tones were used. SO I did not touch this one up. Just fixed the frame. Not sure how I owuld have re-touched it..wonder if those spot pens would have worked.???
thanks for the post..
Click to expand...
There is a difference between touching up a photo and restoring an old photo. Touching up is for minor things like dust spots that show up in the printing. Restoration is far more involved. If a photo is scratched and nicked, the only way to restore it is to make a copy and restore the copy. You can't fix nicks and scratches unless you can replace the missing paper and emulsion and I know of no process to do that.

When you take something in to frame it is not your resposiblity to repair it if it is damaged unless you are an art conservator or have one you work with. Note the condition with the customer so you don't get blamed for the damage and a frame as is.

You might want to get a copy of "Framing Photography" by Allan R. Lamb. It's Volume 6 of the Library of Professional Picture Framing. It's got a very nice guide to the different types of photos that have been produced over the years.
 
Thanks for all the info.
It was damaged by the customers little kid and was brought in that way. If it was known to be our fault trust me I would have fessed up to it. We always give every piece of art an evil eye when coming into the shop and any concerns are then showed to the customer, but even then sometimes things get away from us so we were thinking of trying a photo of each piece to reference to.

It was just for a frame job and as A learning tool I was the one who was wanting to touch it up. No I never touched it up or restored it..I was to afraid of it to even give it a shot. I ended up just framing it and the customer loved it.
But somehow I look at that picture and think to myself there has to be a way for someone to touch that up. I hate the words " I can't" Just hate em!
Doing it on the computer is a piece of cake in comparison and so far that remains the best way to go, but thinking of another picture I am still wondering how in the world a computer is going to raise the letters ("logo" ). So as good as you might be it will awlays remain an instant dead give away that it is a repro and not the original.

I would love to be able to talk with a conservator and find out from them. Better yet I would love to pick the brains of one of these guys. Who taught them? I can;t find any info on it so far?
 
I was wondering were Rebecca and Preservator were on this thread. They seem to be missing but they would have your answers on where to get training in art conservation.

I got my training studying with other retouchers. But what I've done is most geared to the normal work a studio does and copy and restoration. Trying to fix an original instead of a copy is very specialized and time consuming. It's usually reserved for works of significant importance (ie museum pieces). It's easier to copy and restore or make a new print from the negative/file if possible.
 
how do you scan in large prints..say a 32 x 40 ?
piece them together as you would a panoramic??
getting those seams just so it a hassle and a half to be sure.
 
We prefer to photograph large prints with our D100 and studio lights. Much easier than trying to scan in sections and get the edges to match!
faintthud.gif
 
ok I give up a d100 is...?

I just came from a site that claims itself to be by a photographic artist...uh oh! :)
Have you ever seen a photo that was handpainted over? for all practical purposes it is a photograph and then the colors are changed. Like following the dots..You don't have to know how to draw that squirrel, just look at another image of one and try to paint it accordingly..Not debating the merits of this practice, just wondering what kinds of dyes or inks they use.?
 
Marshall's photo dyes are still the ones. For this application, they're similar to oil paints, but adhere to the photographic emulsion better. I found the best "tool" for using it is...a Q-tip!
I'm one that does photo restoration and have for years. I was taught as a teenager by a long-time photographer/studio owner. Little tiny 2-hair brushes,cotton swabs, a steady hand and a sharp eye. Spot-tone was the first dye I used for direct photo retouching. Still do. Practice, trial and (a lot of!) error,patience and, as in anything, is the best teacher. I read, asked, watched the masters who taught me.
It's a tedious and tenacious process, but sometimes it just can't be done by a computer. For instance, those very old oval convex ones. It can be copied but not as a convex shape. I recently did one that came in badly torn, had holes, scratches. Had to patch, make paper pulp, retouch, etc.and the frame too. At $60/hr, it really didn't take that long, and the customer cried when she picked it up. That's the reward, not the money. I have before and after photos, but haven't figured out how to post those yet.
 
A d100 is a professional digital camera. My husband is a professional photographer and we have a photo studio plus a frame shop.

Val, a Q-tip?! :eek: Must be for filling in larger areas. You wouldn't be able to get the fine control needed for small detail work with a Q-tip! For that you need a 000 brush, preferable a Windsor&Newton series 7 or a Strathemore Klasinsky if you can find one. Anyway, your project with the convex photo sounds interesting. Hope you can get the pictures up.

Trapper, I'm a photographic artist. That's my official title in the photographic world. That's what someone who does artwork on photographs is called. It takes years of hands on training. What you saw was probably a photo that had been handcolored with Marshall Photographic Oil paints, which are different than the dyes. I've done many black&white photos that way but you can also paint over color photos using regular oil paints.

However, the point is it takes alot of training an practice to do this kind of work. I've studied with some of the top people in the country, but unfortunately many are now deceased. Very few people still hand color photo. Kodak no longer even makes the right kind of paper to do it on (the photo has to be printed on a special rough surfaced paper so the oil paints adhere.) Most photos that are being colored these days are being done on the computer. I still miss the feel and smell of the oil paints but at least with the computer if they order multiples you only have to do it once and the results are consitent.
 
This thread is sweet, and shows how kind Grumblers are, but ridiculous.

Trapper, from what I am reading here, my understanding is that you don't know enough to know what you don't know. Trying to learn such complex things on the Grumble is just plain silly. It would be like us all trying to learn dentistry on a message board!

If you really are serious about learning photographic conservation and are interested in leaving Alaska and going to school to do so, please e-mail me and I will do my best to forward the info.

Hope this helps.

Rebecca
 
Anne, I used the Q-Tip for "colorizing" the black and white photos with the oil paints, and as you said, for the larger areas. For the skin tones, no brush strokes with a Q-Tip, more even application and doesn't sratch the paper surface. For detail, absolutely the tiniest brust....2-3 hairs max! My first brush was an eyeliner brush that I pulled all but 3 hairs out of, I still have it! It's an antique now, just like me!
I know what you mean about missing the smell of the oils. I loved doing that.
Marshall's makes a kit that you can still do it by hand with, complete with paints, paper to print your photo on the computer and brushes. I bought it at Michael's, aisle 1, but haven't opened it up yet, too busy framing!
I'll try to learn to post pictures of the convex one, wasn't there a thread lately that helped with that? I'll see if I can find it.
 
Rolling my own what? Oh...
party.gif

I'm sure that's what God invented the pinky finger for...shading oils and pastels! People with clean hands make me nervous. Creative places and people are seldom tidy.
 
Why in the world would I ever want to leave Alaska.? Your world out their offers me nothing!
Perhaps it is a ridiculous question,but I have learned a lot. I was hoping more from you.
I never ever expected to learn all that I needed to know and become an expert. Was just looking for general answers and a place to start. Found that!
Your right though about one thing. I don't know enoughSo I ask?
 
Create a Post
Back
Top