What do you think?

January 21st, 2008

Does it look natural? Or totally phony? Or you can’t even tell the difference?

I really want to know what you think!

You see, I’m using Fireworks to clean up some pictures I scanned and I want to make sure I’m not going overboard…

I’m using what’s called the “Blur” tool to smooth away scratches and dust–and it can be tricky and look funky if used with a heavy hand or on certain textures.

The picture below is my oldest sister’s engagement photo from over 10 years ago.

(Her name is Mel and I just love how pretty she looks in it. And her husband is hysterically funny. Man, this makes me miss them!…)

So, what do you think??

Does it look obviously “touched up”??




scan0005 cropped & edited

RSS feed


m | 1/21/2008 10:06 am

Wow, I think it looks great! It looks tons better than the dusty original. Great job, Love!

Tearese | 1/21/2008 10:36 am

yeah, it turned out good. Hey, I was gonna ask how you did those ones of Bubbers a few months ago, where you did the fade to black around the edges? I tried to do it how PW said, and I couldn’t figure it out.

Jesse | 1/21/2008 10:50 am

Looks good to me.

Heidi | 1/21/2008 11:14 am

Charming: Thank you! Sorry–I forgot to say YOU’RE the one who taught me about the “Blur” tool.
Tearese: Thanks! Oh yeah–I loved that effect. I’ll have to ask Charming how we figured that out–since it’s different in Fireworks than Photoshop and now I’ve completely forgotten (I need to write these things down…). I’ll get back to you on that–is that okay?
Jesse: Thanks! I’m glad you got a snowblower and Cori’s enjoying it! I can’t imagine having enough snow that we’d actually have to shovel it… We’re lucky if it covers our green grass for an hour before melting.

Ailene Hert | 1/21/2008 11:44 am

No, it doesn’t look obviously touched up! I wouldn’t have known the difference if you would not have said anything! Great job!

Heidi | 1/21/2008 11:57 am

Perfect–that’s exactly what I was aiming for! Thanks, Ailene!

Andrea | 1/21/2008 2:59 pm

that looks really good! is it a website that you can go to to touch up pictures?

Apple | 1/21/2008 5:14 pm

It looks touched up, but it is not bad. I think that it gives it a kinda cool effect.

Pam | 1/21/2008 6:10 pm

Ooooo, I reached up to the first one to wipe the dust off the monitor! Glad you were able to surgically remove all of the debris. The second photo doesn’t look touched up to me, it just looks like a nice, clear picture. Great job. Can I send you some to do for me? (kidding, of course)

Heidi | 1/21/2008 7:53 pm

Andrea: Thank you! Fireworks is a software program Charming bought for himself and then I took over. :) But there is a free photo editing software that Google offers called “Picasa”. I’ve never used it, but have heard good things about it from my brother.
Thanks, Apple! I appreciate your honest feedback and I agree–for some reason when I look at it, it just has a feel of being edited, though I’m not sure why… I mean, I KNOW that I edited it, but I’m not sure what about the editing is giving me that feeling… Does that make any sense at all?? Anyhow, I’m glad you like the effect of the editing. :)
Pam: LOL! Sure thing! Once I’m done editing these hundreds of pictures for my current project you can send me all yours! (Of course, that may be in about 20 years—but you weren’t in any hurry, were you??) :):) And thank you–I’m glad you liked the finished project!

Julie | 1/27/2008 11:01 am

Yes it does look touched up, but only if you look closely at it. The faces look really good, and that is where most people will look. The scratches on the other distract from the faces, so the edited one does look better.

Heidi | 1/27/2008 4:21 pm

Hi Julie–thank you for your comment! I agree–the dust was really distracting, which is what I was trying to minimize. And editing faces is one of those tricky places, so I’m glad you think it turned out well!


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.