Photo Challenge (not for the weak hearted)

Back in 1970 I was amazed that Ilford had ASA1000 film which was more
sensitive than TRI-X . It was thinner and the first time I loaded it
into the developing reel, I ruined a shot (London). Though ruining one
no-so-great shot was no big deal...45 years later I decided to try some
new tools. Before I post the results I wanted to see if anyone wanted a
go at this. I don't blame anyone for not trying but ????




https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpvde9o2km...my008.JPG?dl=0

In article , philo wrote:

Back in 1970 I was amazed that Ilford had ASA1000 film which was
more sensitive than TRI-X . It was thinner and the first time I
loaded it into the developing reel, I ruined a shot (London).
Though ruining one no-so-great shot was no big deal...45 years
later I decided to try some new tools. Before I post the results I
wanted to see if anyone wanted a go at this. I don't blame anyone
for not trying but ????

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpvde9o2km...my008.JPG?dl=0

Is the challenge to save the photo?

--
Sandman

On 02/05/2015 04:25 AM, Tony Barry wrote:
On Thursday, 5 February 2015 07:24:34 UTC+8, philo wrote:
Back in 1970 I was amazed that Ilford had ASA1000 film which was more
sensitive than TRI-X . It was thinner and the first time I loaded it
into the developing reel, I ruined a shot (London). Though ruining one
no-so-great shot was no big deal...45 years later I decided to try some
new tools. Before I post the results I wanted to see if anyone wanted a
go at this. I don't blame anyone for not trying but ????




https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpvde9o2km...my008.JPG?dl=0

Unfortunately my Yosemite upgrade has destroyed Photoshop for the moment so I cannot add the caption direct, but they read:

snip

I do a lot of computer repair work and recently advised someone to hold
off on an upgrade to Yosemite for the time being.

Did you try uninstalling Photoshop , then re-installing?

On 2015-02-05 10:25:39 +0000, Tony Barry said:

On Thursday, 5 February 2015 07:24:34 UTC+8, philo wrote:
Back in 1970 I was amazed that Ilford had ASA1000 film which was more
sensitive than TRI-X . It was thinner and the first time I loaded it
into the developing reel, I ruined a shot (London). Though ruining one
no-so-great shot was no big deal...45 years later I decided to try some
new tools. Before I post the results I wanted to see if anyone wanted a
go at this. I don't blame anyone for not trying but ????




https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpvde9o2km...my008.JPG?dl=0

Unfortunately my Yosemite upgrade has destroyed Photoshop for the
moment so I cannot add the caption direct, but they read:

What version of PS was "destroyed?
Certainly not CS5, CS6, or CC?

....and if you wanted to add captions or mark up the JPEG in antway you
could have used *Preview* in Yosemite.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 2015020507173780278-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2015-02-05 10:25:39 +0000, Tony Barry
said:

philo:
Back in 1970 I was amazed that Ilford had ASA1000 film which was
more sensitive than TRI-X . It was thinner and the first time I
loaded it into the developing reel, I ruined a shot (London).
Though ruining one no-so-great shot was no big deal...45 years
later I decided to try some new tools. Before I post the results
I wanted to see if anyone wanted a go at this. I don't blame
anyone for not trying but ????

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpvde9o2km...my008.JPG?dl=0

Tony Barry:
Unfortunately my Yosemite upgrade has destroyed Photoshop for the
moment so I cannot add the caption direct, but they read:

What version of PS was "destroyed? Certainly not CS5, CS6, or CC?

While "destroyed" might be a harsh word, upgrading to Yosemite might lose som
Creative Cloud settings/files, surely? I don't remember having to reinstall
Creative Cloud for Yosemite specifically, but I do remember some update in the
past borking my installation of CC in some way. I.e. it may not be Photoshop
that has been messed with, but CC.

...and if you wanted to add captions or mark up the JPEG in antway
you could have used *Preview* in Yosemite.

Indeed, it's pretty powerful these days. I use Skitch for such things as well.

--
Sandman

In article , Tony Barry
wrote:

Savageduck:
What version of PS was "destroyed? Certainly not CS5, CS6, or CC?
...and if you wanted to add captions or mark up the JPEG in
antway you could have used *Preview* in Yosemite.

-- Regards, Savageduck

Sure I could have used something else. I decided the captions could
happily stand alone. Maybe I was wrong.

I'm not alone with the Adobe CS5 problem - see eg

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photos...problems-with-
photoshop-cs5-after-installing-yosemite-version-10-10-on-imac

Here are some tips:
http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/...rable-problem-
occurr.html

--
Sandman

On 02/05/2015 10:12 AM, Tony Barry wrote:




--
Sandman

"destroyed" as in "no longer works, probably will need reinstalling. Dead, deceased, fallen off its perch, no longer with us ..... etc etc"

But it is OK, I was NOT seeking help in sorting out the problem, which is well covered elsewhere, and I'll get round to it when it becomes a priority.



but it now is a priority as no one has taken on the challenge I offered.

On 2015-02-05 16:25:31 +0000, philo said:

On 02/05/2015 10:12 AM, Tony Barry wrote:

"destroyed" as in "no longer works, probably will need reinstalling.
Dead, deceased, fallen off its perch, no longer with us ..... etc etc"

But it is OK, I was NOT seeking help in sorting out the problem, which
is well covered elsewhere, and I'll get round to it when it becomes a
priority.

but it now is a priority as no one has taken on the challenge I offered.

We have yet to figure out what exactly the challenge is. That remains a
mystery since all you did was post a link to the image.

Were you looking for some sort of recovery from a ruined negative?


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2015-02-05 17:02:07 +0000, Savageduck said:

On 2015-02-05 16:25:31 +0000, philo said:

On 02/05/2015 10:12 AM, Tony Barry wrote:

"destroyed" as in "no longer works, probably will need reinstalling.
Dead, deceased, fallen off its perch, no longer with us ..... etc etc"

But it is OK, I was NOT seeking help in sorting out the problem, which
is well covered elsewhere, and I'll get round to it when it becomes a
priority.

but it now is a priority as no one has taken on the challenge I offered.

We have yet to figure out what exactly the challenge is. That remains a
mystery since all you did was post a link to the image.

Were you looking for some sort of recovery from a ruined negative?

Just for the Hell of it...

To start with the negative was inverted for printing, hebce directions
were reversed, and the street signs were mirrored.
So, all I can tell you is, you shot that in an English city, on the
street where there is a *Leeds Permanant Building Society*, and I am
not sure if your intended subject was the Rolls-Royce, or the London
taxi.
https://db.tt/ZT5Xrmgd

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 02/05/2015 11:25 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2015-02-05 17:02:07 +0000, Savageduck
said:

On 2015-02-05 16:25:31 +0000, philo said:

On 02/05/2015 10:12 AM, Tony Barry wrote:

"destroyed" as in "no longer works, probably will need reinstalling.
Dead, deceased, fallen off its perch, no longer with us ..... etc etc"

But it is OK, I was NOT seeking help in sorting out the problem,
which is well covered elsewhere, and I'll get round to it when it
becomes a priority.

but it now is a priority as no one has taken on the challenge I offered.

We have yet to figure out what exactly the challenge is. That remains
a mystery since all you did was post a link to the image.

Were you looking for some sort of recovery from a ruined negative?

Just for the Hell of it...

To start with the negative was inverted for printing, hebce directions
were reversed, and the street signs were mirrored.
So, all I can tell you is, you shot that in an English city, on the
street where there is a *Leeds Permanant Building Society*, and I am not
sure if your intended subject was the Rolls-Royce, or the London taxi.
https://db.tt/ZT5Xrmgd




LOL

I was so busy trying to see if I could restore the image I did not even
look close enough to realize I had "flipped" the negative.

Yep that was in London 1971 and a Rolls-Royce.

I posted to see if anyone would like to fool with it and try to see if
they could restore it. I don't know if I've ever seen a much worse negative


When I realized it would take a ton of work to completely restore the
image, I decided to leave it in a surrealistic state

So here is my result which I have left reversed


https://www.dropbox.com/s/obdxle3cjw...lls_L.jpg?dl=0