Sharpening Pictures

I messed something up yesterday, so I am going to try and turn it into a teachable moment.

I posted a mystery picture that looks fine but could look better. Right click on the link and open it in a new tab. Here is the same picture looking a little better; right click on the picture and open it in a new tab, too.

Now, click back and forth between the two tabs with the different pictures and see if you can see the difference. Today's picture looks a little better, a little more crisp; let's call it a little more sharp. Can't see the difference? Check out the tree leaves as you jump back and forth between the tabs; see how they pop into focus and are less blurry? Or, the pattern on Annette's dress? Once you get used to seeing it, everything looks a little more sharp.

What I forgot to do to yesterday's picture, which I corrected on today's picture, is to use the "sharpen" tool in Photoshop after I shrank the picture down to viewing size. Some programs, including Photoshop, call it "unsharpen mask". Sharpening increases the contrast between closely located pixels in an image, making their edges look more distinct. Many programs allow sophisticated adjustments of the sharpening process, which will yield vastly different results. Or, you can do as I did here and use the software's automatic sharpening function.

Wikipedia has a good article on the process.

Oversharpening an image will make it look anywhere between weird and bad. It is always better to not sharpen or undersharpen an original image, since you can always apply the sharpening process to a copy (don't mess up the original!) later in Photoshop or whatever program you use.

Mystery Picture 090929 - Revisited

The September 29 mystery picture was referenced at the Stutz Barn site, where Susan noted in the comments that Grandpa would have been person "#15, but he was busy taking the picture". Well, as it turns out, I have several other pictures from the same series, and they include #15!

I won't bother with an identification list since everyone (but #15) were in the earlier post. I do wonder, though, who took the photo of the larger group including Grandpa? Does anyone know?

The three slides from this series are numbered 6, 9, and 10, so I know there are other slides from this family reunion. If anyone finds them and would like to share, please let me know. As always, I am willing to scan and return them.

Also, the slides were developed in January 1968, but I think it is safe to say that they were not taken in January in Provo. Does anyone know the date of this reunion?

Finally, there is at least one other roll that was developed in January 1968, which -- as mentioned in an earlier post -- can lead to file naming problems. That one also has a picture numbered 10, so I know the two rolls overlap. Sorting these things out is part of the intrigue of archiving the family history!

Mystery Picture 090930

Here is a three-pack of pictures of Grandma, Ellen, and John. The slides are from June 1973 and are from the place Grandma was baptized -- Jimmy Gee's pig hole (per the slide frame).

So here's the mystery -- who is Jimmy Gee and where is the pig hole? I'll bet there are pretty good stories about both the baptism and the return visit to the site.

UPDATE

Susan spoke with Grandma about these pictures, and, I have to say, Grandma has the best baptism story I have every heard.

"The ditch was dirt at the time, with a wooden head-gate. Grandma's sister, Aunt Marian, accompanied and insisted that Grandma should wear a 'nice dress' for her baptism. The bishop was a farmer and told all the kids to just show up. Grandma was 9 yrs old. The boys were told to go to one side and change, and the girls to the other side. After it was over, she and marian went home. Grandmas said she tried real hard not to sin again, but in church the next day she and another kid wrestled to see who would help an old lady who had dropped a 'hat pin' in the isle...they both wanted to be good and helpful... and they ended up head butting each other in the middle of church. It didn't knock her out, but she's pretty sure the other kid went out cold for a minute or two."

These pictures are from slides developed in June 1973.

Mystery Picture 090929

I know this picture is from a family reunion at Grandma and Grandpa's house about 1967. Who can you identify in the picture? As with the previous, similar mystery picture, here is a larger resolution image followed by a smaller, numbered image and a list for names. I will start off with Grandma (although I recognize many more), and you can post comments adding to the list.


1 -Kent
2 -Janet
3 - Grandma
4 -Ellen
5 -Priscilla
6 -Tom
7 -Annette
8 -Lloyd
9 -Susan
10 -Angie
11 -Mike
12 -Craig
13 -Kenni Lynn
14 -John

UPDATE

Dave and Angie suggest names in the comments. Dr. Reub (hello, Uncle Craig!) suggested the names in a comment to another post. Where they disagreed, I went with who I thought was correct. Tell me if I'm wrong!

This post also got a mention at the Stutz Barn, so if anyone happens to wander here from there, welcome to Grandpa's Apple Press.

I look at this post some more and include additional pictures at Mystery Picture 090929 - Revisited.

Open For Business

I spoke with Grandma on the phone last month, and Susan spoke with Grandpa last week, about this archiving project. Both have encouraged the efforts to archive, compile, and disseminate the family history. With their approval, Grandpa's Apple Press will now be open for business and announced to a wider audience.

Thank you to everyone who has contributed and helped work out the blog's kinks this past month. I am announcing the blog on Facebook tonight. If anyone would like to post an entry on Stutz Barn about it or e-mail the blog address to other family members, I would appreciate it. If anyone has suggestions or would like to contribute, that would be great, too.

Melt My Heart

In the comments to the post about Rosies Surprise, Susan tells me something that melts my heart:

"As a side note, grandpa is totally happy you are doing this, and although he can't see very well, he is looking forward to hearing about the pictures...and this will be fun for him to try to remember the details...He loves what you are doing, and even got emotional about it. I will call you tomorrow and tell you more. But in a nutshell, he wants you to keep on keeping on, and he will try to fill in as many gaps as he can. I've been going down every saturday and will feed back to you what I learn. I am excited about it too. Thanks so very very much. Love susan"

Thank you, Susan! I am reminded of the importance of family and our family history, and I am determined to approach the sometimes tedious task of archiving our family history with a renewed enthusiasm.

Mystery Picture 090928

Do you know anything about this picture? Tell me!

Who are these three women? Are any of the the same women as an earlier mystery picture? Does the shadow give us any clue who the photographer is? What mountain looms high?

UPDATE

I guess I was way off on guessing the where, when, and who of this picture, which is from an album. Susan says in the comments:

"These people are probably friends from BYU pre-marriage days. The mountains in the background suggest southern utah. But the picture itself rang no bells."

What Would You Do? Slide Dates -- Again!

So, I usually don't tell you when my fancy pants file naming method for slides works -- and it almost always does. But, sometimes I encounter a problem or two, some of which are easier to resolve than others. Today I present a third, more intractable problem.

The file naming method uses the information printed and written on a slide's frame to name the digital file. What should I do when different slides from different rolls contain the same information? Here is an example:

As you can see, all the slides are developed as "AUG 61D". But, there are differences. The top left one has the date printed in black and the slide number also printed in black. The top right one has the date embossed but the slide number printed in black. The bottom left on has the date printed in red and the slide number also printed in red (very faint). The bottom left one has the date embossed but the slide number printed in red. This tells me there are four different rolls, separately developed, and (unfortunately, from an archiving perspective) with the same information.

What would you do?

I solved the problem by putting a number (1-4) after the date information in the file name so that the slides are at least grouped by roll. This is an imperfect solution for two reasons. First, future "AUG 61D" slides might not be easy to group with the correct roll, since I do not record an image of the slide frame; hopefully, this blog entry will help with this issue by recording what the frame of each roll looked like. Second, some slide frames actually have a number printed after the date information; while this potentially could be confusing, none of the "AUG 61D" rolls had a number, so I figured this was an acceptable solution.

So, the problem was basically solved, until I found this:

Not only does it have the same information in the same format as the bottom right slide above, it also has the same frame number! This means that there are at least two rolls that look exactly the same, and determining which slide goes with which roll (based on content) might be difficult or impossible.

What would you do?

I ended up just identifying the second slide at frame "4 -2" and left it at that. There were not enough slides to spend to much time sorting it out right now. But, it does raise the possibility that my file naming method does not create unique enough names for rolls of slides that are printed with the same information on the frame. Thus, other rolls potentially have mixed up slides. I figure this is rare simply because I have not seen it before. But, it is a problem without an elegant solution.

Rosies Surprise

Dave disagreed with a file naming decision I made in an earlier post. OK. Still, I would love to have more pictures (or a diary entry?) from this trip Grandpa took. Unfortunately, this is the only slide I have from 1984. I am curious, where is Rosie's Surprise? Or, perhaps, who is Rosie and what was her surprise?

Here is the image:

UPDATE

Susan spoke with Grandpa about the story behind this picture and related the following:

"Rob, when I described the slide to dad, he related the following... in the 1980's your grandpa was involved in a reclaiming project at a huge-giganitic coal-strip mine in the 4-corners area. Rosie, a navajo-indian, (who he remembers well),was employed to pick atriplex seeds. He also remembers taking a picture of her at the sunrise (or possibly sunset), out in the fields."

Thank you for the the update, Susan! I wonder, why was this place was called Rosie's Surprise?

More Horses

Dave and Susan did a great job identifying the horses in my earlier post. Thanks you two! Let's throw up a few more pictures of horses that just *happen* to have Dave and Susan in them. First, here's Susan and her family with a fat horse named Tiny from the early 1990s.

Next, here's Dave (on Oscar?) with Joe and someone else (who?) in the early 1970s. Who is on the horse to the left, and what is that horse's name?

Finally, a super deluxe bonus picture from the mid-1960s of John, Susan, and Ellen having fun on a horse. Is this Tony, too?

Creative Shots - Get Close and Use Macro

Over on her blog, Susan has some great images of thistles that demonstrate how getting close to the subject can add a lot of beauty and drama to a picture of what would otherwise be -- let's face it -- an annoying plant. Use the macro function on your camera (typically, it has a flower icon) for the best effect.

This works well with bugs:


And kids with bugs:


And just kids:



TIP: Get close to your subject, use the macro function, and practice by taking lots of pictures. One of them will turn out all right. (And, if not, keep practicing!)

Where Is Lori?

I am looking for a baby picture of Lori, Tom's daughter. I know where Lori is on Facebook (Hi, Lori!). Might anyone have a picture of her as a baby in their album, slides, or negatives?

I should mention that I am willing to digitize our family history 35mm slides and negatives that you have. If you send them to me, I will scan and return them with a CD or DVD of the images. All the pictures on this blog came from source material that various people have lent to me! I can (and have) scanned many printed pictures, but am focusing on film originals right now. If you are interested, contact me through my Facebook account or by emailing me at stutz at montana dot com.

I am also looking for a better distribution method for the pictures I have scanned, if anyone has suggestions.

UPDATE

Cathy writes in the comments:

"Funny you ask...we cannot ever find baby pictures of Lori. I think we have pictures of her, beginning around 3 and 4."

Oh, this was no coincidence, Cathy. I am trying to sleuth out the mysterious baby picture of Lori that must exist somewhere!

Mystery Picture 090924

Do you know anything about these pictures? Tell me!

I don't know much about these pictures, except that they were stored in the same general vicinity (with some other pictures) as a modern scrap of paper that said "Yellowstone - Denver-Cardston boxers". Or, was it "Yellowstone-Denver-Cardston boxers"? Some of the other pictures were obviously taken in Yellowstone, but they were not labeled.

I like that the top one has an obvious obelisk-type structure. The bottom one also has an obelisk-type structure (near the top), but it is not as immediately apparent because the negative was double exposed, with the non-obelisk image being dominant. Who is the person in the second picture? Where were these taken?

TIP: Label your pictures! This can be done on the physical picture, as part of a scrapbook (paper or digital), or digitally (for example, as part of the file name).

Creative Shots - Fun House Mirror Cell Phone Effect

Dave posted a beautiful pair of pictures today of lightning over Mumbai, and it got me thinking. Family history is not just about archiving past events; it is also about documenting all the great things going on now. After all, without recording current events, there will no documentation of the family's history for future generations to reflect upon.

So everyone -- take pictures, shoot videos, keep a journal, record your family's oral history, and share it.

Sometimes, all I have handy to take pictures is my cell phone. I have found a way to take creative shots that -- due the inner-workings of my phone that I don't understand -- often makes pictures look like they were shot in a fun house mirror. The distortion takes a generic picture and makes it a little less boring.

Here are two pictures from a recent picnic in the park:

So how did I do it? No Photoshop here! I stood in front of my subject and threw my cell phone up in the air, spinning, while pushing the shutter button. Most pictures are lousy, and, really, they don't document much. But they are kind of interesting and the boys love them!

Do you have a favorite or useful technique to share? Let me know! Some are fairly low risk (throwing your cell phone up in the air) and others are higher risk (standing on a metal table on top of a building during a lightning storm). If it helps capture the moment, though, your techniques are welcome.

UPDATE

I found out that the effect is due to the rolling shutter processing used by CMOS image sensors that are common in cell phones and some still and video cameras.

Mystery Picture 090923

Do you know anything about this picture? Tell me!

I should probably know this....

UPDATE

I was wrong! There apparently is no reason for me to know this cute couple, who was in an album. Susan writes:

"Neither of the G-parents knew this one. The best guess is they were college friends, perhaps a room mate of something"

Mystery Picture 090922

This slide was developed in April 1976 and identifies "Ellen, Annette, Kathy, Susan, Mom". Who is Kathy (long, brown hair, I presume)? And, who is the baby?

Here is the largest resolution detail I have of the baby.

UPDATE

Susan writes in the comments to a different post (but I think she meant it for this one):

"now you'll know... Kathy is Grandpa's nephew's wife...put another way, my cousin's wife. My cousin's name is Leonard Carlson and he is Aunt Fern's son. Aunt Fern is Grandpa's older sister."

Is this Kathy's baby?

Karen contributes, "Yep, that's Amber. Karen (Dot's dtr)"

Dirty Slides - What To Do About Dust

A common issue with the old slides I scan is dust. Lots of it. Although the Coolscan's Digital ICE can remove dust and, sometimes, scratches from a a scanned image, it often does not work, or does not work well, on Kodachrome slides. Besides, the scanner works better if it can "see" what is on the slide rather than "guess" what is missing. So, let's talk about dirty slides and how to clean them.

First, a dirty Kodachrome slide. Sorry about the trapezoid shape, but I shot it picture at a low angle to see the dust better.

When we look at a detail of the slide before cleaning, the amount of dust is even more apparent.

Fortunately, I have super secret method -- which I will share -- for cleaning the slides. But first, here is the slide after cleaning.

Here is a detail of the same part of the slide after cleaning.

Big improvement, I'd say, even though a very few specks of dust remained that I did not worry about. Life is too short.

So the super secret method? Well, it had to be gentle and non-destructive. And, it has to effectively clean dust. My choice, an all-natural feather duster. Here it is:

I know, I know; some people will say that any method that physically contacts the slide has too much potential for damaging the slide. Perhaps a puff of canned air would work better? Perhaps not, or perhaps the blast of compressed air would damage the slide.

Judgment is important, and I do not use the feather duster on anything that appears fragile. My technique is not to rub the slide with any pressure, but to quickly flick the slide with the tips of the feathers. Finally, the feather duster does not work on dirt or other debris solidly attached to the slide. Some problems cannot be solved outside of professional restoration and archiving.

TIP: Gently clean your slides and other source materials before digitizing.

Mystery Picture 090921

Do you know anything about these pictures? Tell me!
I think I see Grandpa in several pictures; who else is there and what is going on? It sure looks like fun!

UPDATE

Grandpa told Susan the story behind these pictures, which she related in the comments:

"These pictures are of when he [Grandpa], as a graduate student, was on field trip with his beloved professor, Dr. Burt Harrison of BYU, about 1948. He can't remember details of where they went. But he sure did love that professor of his!"

I wonder what classes Grandpa took from Dr. Harrison? These pictures are from an album.

What Would You Do? Slides Dated in Wrong Order

OK, so this question is similar to the previous WWYD, but involving two pictures, each with a plausible date when viewed separately.

The first has source information written on it dating it August 20, 1973. It is frame 1 on a roll with the description "SEP 73 P 4".

The second has source information written on it dating it June 22, 1973. It is frame 21 on a roll with the description "SEP 73 P 4".

The problem? If both are from the same roll "SEP 73 P 4" then how did a pictured dated August 20, 1973, end up on the frame 1 but a picture dated June 22, 1973, end up on frame 21?

There are several possible explanations that do not involve a time machine. First, the source description (printed on the slide frame by the developer) could be wrong, such as if the slides were put in the frames in reverse order. Second, the source information (written on the slide) could be wrong, such as if the dates were wrong. Third, the roll of film could have been shot backwards, with the the numbering running from largest numbers to smallest; I have seen this happen before on a roll from my wedding (I was very aware of which events happened first, despite the numbering on the roll), and it may be fairly common but unnoticed on old rolls. Fourth, there could be two rolls of film "SEP 73 P 4"; I have seen this before (I will do another WWYD on it) where the multiple rolls are developed in one month (e.g. "SEP 73"), although I honestly do not know what the description "P 4" means.

What would you do?

I did the same thing I did with the mismatched dates on a single slide. I recorded all information from the slides into the file names and gave Grandpa the benefit of the doubt about which dates to apply to the images.

It may be possible in the future to solve this mystery if I get other "SEP 73 P 4" slides. These might show that there are multiple rolls or that the written information was incorrect. Unfortunately, I have only four slides from "SEP 73 P 4", and they do not solve the puzzle.

One thing I will not do -- although it might explain if there are two rolls involved or if there is one roll shot backward -- is dismantle the frame (mount?) and look directly at the film for information. It would be too destructive of the old, paper frame (and, possibly, the film).

Mystery Picture 090919

Do you know anything about these pictures? Tell me!


These pictures are hilarious, and I know nothing about them! Who is this couple? Where? When? And, what are they doing?

UPDATE

Susan writes, "I can tell that's grandpa...but I have no idea who the gal is."

What Would You Do? Mismatched Dates on Slides

So, I have a fancy pants file naming method that I use when saving images that I have archived. This method requires inclusion of both the source description that exists as an original part of the source material and any additional information existing on the source material in addition to the source description. What do you do when these conflict?


Here, the date description shows the slide was developed in February 1984. But, Grandpa wrote that the picture is from September 1984, after the slide was developed.

What would you do?

I know what I did -- I recorded all information from the slide into the file name and gave Grandpa the benefit of the doubt about which date to apply to this image. Thus, this file is named:

840900.FEB 84 P 3 (23).'Rosies surprise' - Lake Powell (Sept 84).jpg

This seemingly impossible file name (to my eyes) is just gibberish (to your eyes, probably) unless you understand the file naming method I use. But, it presents a very minor diversion about how either memories or film developing can be fallible. That's about the extent of the diversion -- humans are fallible.

TIP: You cannot undue past mistakes -- and you certainly should not try to rewrite history -- but you can ensure that our fallible moments are preserved as an important part of the human experience.

UPDATE

Dave writes in the comments

Oooh - I'd disagree with you on this one. I would expect the automated dating system from a photo developing place to be much more accurate than a penciled-in recollection. I would bet this was taken in September 1983 (not 4) and then developed in February 1984.

Maybe. Probably. Hopefully, we can find out.

What Would You Do? Digital ICE with Kodachrome

My Coolscan film/slide scanner has Digital ICE, which can reduce dust and scratches from scanned materials. ICE does not work well with most Kodachrome slides, though, and Grandpa loved to use Kodachrome.

Using ICE with Kodachrome involves tradeoffs and a requires a judgment call. Here is one example of the tradeoffs from a picture of Grandma's graduation.

Scanned as a Kodachrome with no Digital ICE:

Scanned as a Kodachrome with Digital ICE:

Scanned as a non-Kodachrome slide with Digital ICE:

In the first picture, there are obvious defects caused by dust, dirt, and scratches.

In the second picture, the ICE has removed some of the defects, but many are still obvious. However, a new defect has been introduced, a blurring of detail, especially where different colors meet. This blurring is most noticeable (to me, at least) at the bottom of Grandma's collar.

In the third picture, the ICE has removed most defects, but the blurring is even more pronounced and is visible along a number of edges in the image.

Which would you do? Which picture would you keep -- the one with the fewest blurred details, the one with the fewest defects, or somewhere in between?

I opted for the second picture. The way I see it, the defects are now part of the source material, and I would rather not introduce more defects during the archiving process. The second picture removes original defects without really introducing new ones, a tradeoff I am willing to make. If need be, I can use Photoshop Elements to remove additional defects in a copy of the image.

BTW, congratulations on your graduation, Grandma!

Mystery Picture 090917

I see Grandma in this picture (fourth from right, back row), and it appears to be a Christmas bazaar, probably at church. What else can you tell me about this picture and the people in it?

Although the color is not great -- it was scanned from a fade print -- it looks much better (with little effort) after running Easy.Filter

Naming Scanned Slides

When archiving, you need a consistent method of naming files so that you can organize and find the files. Over time, I have developed a file naming method that works for most files I am archiving, as follows:

YYMMDD.Source description.Source information.External information.File type

YYMMDD = The two digit year, month, and date information (e.g., 090916). This allows the file types to sort automatically by date when in their computer directory.

Source description = Any description that exists as an original part of the source material. On a slide, for example, this would include the information printed on the frame by the developer.

Source information = Any additional information existing on the source material in addition to the source description. Often with slides, for example, information will be written on the frame about the image. It is very important to maintain all the information about the slide, as this provides all the know context for the image at the time of archiving.

External information = Any additional information about the the source gained from outside sources. This information could come from related source material or from someone's identification of the content of the source. I rarely have external information, although I hope to gain some (from you!) about the Mystery Pictures I post.

File type = The file extension, such as jpg or pdf.

(Note that I use periods to separate each component of the file name.)

Let's see an example of how this works in real life. First, let's get a slide with an interesting picture.

Here's Grandma doing something, somewhere, sometime. The slide frame provides some important about the image.

Aha! There is a source description on one part of the frame and some source information on another part. Using my file naming method, here what I named the file:

710300.MAR 71 P 4 (17).Mom pitching a little wow - trip to Manila.jpg

Broken down by file name component, here I how I came up with each:

YYMMDD = I used the information about when the slide was developed, substituting 00 for the unknown date.

Source description = I used the information printed on the frame by the developer, beginning with the date, followed by the roll information, and concluding with the frame number in parentheses, each component separated by a space.

Source information = I used the information written on the frame.

External information = None! I would like to know why Grandma was doing traveling to Manila, with whom she traveled, etc., but need external sources to provide this context.

File type = I kept the jpg file extension that is necessary for identifying the type of file.

And that's it in a nutshell! In real life, things fall apart sometimes and I have difficulty with missing or obscured information. In those cases, I just do the best I can to maintain the file name method.

UPDATE

Susan adds in the comments some great memories that provide context for this picture and for her current profession.

"Your Uncle Tom taught school for awhile in Manilla Utah. It is out in what's called the basin (eastern utah) Tom tells some great stories about the couple of years he spent there. Both Carl and Boyd were both little toddlers. I remember the visits as being really fun. Once Tom took us to his classroom. I loved playing school in his room and that was probably why I decided to be a teacher too."

BTW, am I reading the slide correctly to say "Mom pitching a little wow"? I know "snow" would make more sense than "wow", but it sure looks like "wow" to me!

Mystery Picture 090916

Hi Grandpa and Grandma!
Where are you? What are you doing? When was this picture taken?

UPDATE

Susan writes the story behind this picture, which is from an album:

"This is grandma and grandpa still in dating mode. They are down by Utah Lake, a very popular place for BYU kids to hang. Grandma is wearing her mother's coat, which was one of her favorites possessions."

I wonder what year this was?

Mystery Picture 090915

Do you know anything about this picture? Tell me!

The picture is from the late 1950s. Is it Craig? Where is he? How did he get there? The boots are a nice touch.

UPDATE

Dave writes in the comments, "There are a bunch of pictures of a trip that Grandpa and Craig made to Iran. I would bet that this is from that era."

I don't know, but I have not yet come across the Iran pictures. I dated it to the late 1950s based on the slide frame, which was extra thick with a glass mount, the same as several other pictures from the late 1950s I have scanned.

I found another image of Craig in the same outfit and concluded -- for now -- that it is from Turkey in 1961 at Mystery Picture 090915 - Revisited.