A 1964 wedding restored.

Recently, a fellow photographer (Jerry) I had corresponded with via photo.net

commissioned me to restore the photographs from his own 1964 wedding. The objective

was to scan the images, fix them like new, and create an 34 image album to give his wife

on their 40th wedding anniversary. They had never gotten around to making an album !

 

The film shot by the hired pro was is very bad shape with mold having attacked many

images. However, Jerry's uncle had also shot many candids using an un-metered Leica M3

loaded with Kodachrome. Those images were almost perfect and scanned like a charm.

 

If you wonder what you are doing sometimes, take a look at these and realize how

valuable a service we all perform. 40 years later these images live on to bring delight and

feelings of young love that once was... and against the odds, still thrives with-in the hearts

of this couple.<div></div>

The couple exits the church, and has rice tossed at them (a custom long gone now in my

area of the country). In fact, I had to clone rice out of the brides hair in 25 images.<div></div>

The B&G leave for the reception. The car is a Oldsmobile Holiday with two tone paint.<div></div>

Here's a B&W shot by the Pro. The whole area around the garter was obliterated by fungus,

as was the part of the dress, hair and ribbon of the bridesmaid.

 

Ladies, check out the fashions!<div></div>

Here's a snap of the happy young Bride & Groom at the reception.<div></div>

This is Jerry today... exactly 40 years later.<div></div>

Excellent Marc. I'm sure the couple was quite pleased with this. I

know my parents still bemoan the loss of many of the their

wedding pictures; the lab lost many of the slides that they sent to

be printed.

 

As someone that works with older manual gear, it's also nice to

see some great photos taken with something other than the

latest digital.

 

Thanks for posting these.

BTW, this is what the Pro's "attacked" images looked like before I went to work on them.

This one wasn't worth the effort it would require, so it's one of the few I left "as is" to show

Jerry what I had to do.<div></div>

Marc,

 

Many years ago I did photo restoration usings only brushes, dyes, pencils, scraper knife, airbrush, and whatever else might get the job done. The process involved copying the original and restored prints many times, and that was just for B/W. Now, Photoshop (etc) makes such a task an enjoyable and satisfying experience.

 

You did a wonderful job, and those "old" photos are beautiful. Kodachrome is wonderful. I have slides from a trip to the middle east in 1962 from Kodachrome and a Leica M3 that are as good today as when first processed.

 

I appreciate your thoughts about the impact of our work as wedding photographers. I often like to think I am providing a service rather than just making money.

Marc that restoration was a real labor of love, and much appreciated. Your story also vindicates all those complaining "Uncle Bob with a camera" comments.

 

This also makes me feel a little guilty for not putting together a wedding album for my parents for their 50th anniversary. Their wedding pictures are a set of stero slides in glass holders. Those are also probably Kodachrome.

Marc, Thank you for showing us what photo software is really for, your labor gives us insperation.

I just wish all film lasted as long as kodachrome

Nice work Marc... I did think the indoor shot of the couple was too red and also had flash shine on faces... How's this...<div></div>

Much better Mary.

On second thought, the fix looks a bit on the green side especially in the whites, and a

touch anemic overall.

 

Different monitor calibrations?

 

I tend to process a bit more red for computer prints (which these were) to counter the

tendency of ink-jets to cast toward green. The actual print had good skin tone.

 

Maybe something in between (or at least a try, because you never know on the web ; -)<div></div>

If one of the principals may add some commentary.....

 

Matt-She was more than pleased, and surprised to. And to think my first thoughts for our 40th was to get her a horse!

 

Todd-I sincerly doubt there will ever be a color emulsion that surpasses the old Kodachrome. In that these were shot in 64', it was Kodachrome II. I husband the 40 rolls of K-25 I have left in the freezer carefully. Down to only 1400+ images left.

 

Bruce-Close thinking it was "Uncle Bob". Actually it was my Uncle Bill. Can't recall seeing him ever use a meter.

 

And Marc, it ain't over! Sheila found five prints and one more chrome slide she wants in the album. You'll be happy to know these are all in good shape though.

 

Thanks again,

 

Jerry

Hi Jerry, bring 'em on. What ever Sheila wants, Sheila gets. Let's not wait another 40 years

to complete the job ; -)

 

Here is Jerry's Uncle Bill ( bottom left corner with pipe). Amazingly, someone shot this

scene with him in the picture just before he shot the church exit scene posted above.<div></div>

Marc - yes mine has a very slight green tint in the whites but I like the faces better. You have to realize, or course, that is just my taste and it may be that our monitors are different. Your second version is very magenta to my taste in the faces and arms. I think it probably has more to do with the film of that day and the exposure than your color work. I tried to remove some of the green before I uploaded because I noticed it to but then I didn't like the flesh tones. The greenish tinge which on my monitor is very slight doesn't bother me.. But - that's just my taste. <p>I really enjoyed looking at these old shots and think you did a fantastic job! It's a labor of love.

Actually, this brings up an interesting dilemma. Monitor calibration is a real problem in

almost every sector of photography. My Monitor color profile is written for maximum

output from my two printers (an Epson 2200 and a Kodak 8500 dye-sub. I had to balance

between the two printers and make slight tweaks via actions once an image was ready to

print ( the Kodak increases in contrast compared to the 2200, and the 2200 has a

tendency toward a very slight green cast).

 

In Mary's fix, the cyan cast is visible on my monitor and my images are a bit toward the

magenta, where it is obviously not just a bit on Mary's monitor.

 

Then we compress it all for web posting.

 

It's a wonder that any of this stuff looks reasonably decent on the screen ; -)

Gorgeous photos and great restoration. I hope my wedding photos will be cherished from 50 years on. That is my biggest desire.

Thanks Evrim.

 

What is ironic is that my wife is really jealous of the brides my partner and I shoot for. If

only I knew what I know now. I would've flown Mary Ball here to shoot it, and had a much

happier spouse!

Excellent restoration work!. <BR><BR>OT; Kodachrome-X; asa 64 was available in Kodapak; ie Instamatic 126; and is mentioned in the "new" article on "instant loading" on page 45 & 46 Popular Photography; May 1963.....I once heard that it was developed for Kodapak; but maybe this is an old wives tale..... We have some/few Kodachrome-X slides here shot in 1964 or 1965 when we lived in Birmingham Michigan;. They are alot more grainy; coarser; that the Kodachrome II . My results with Kodachrome-X always seemed to be alot worse than Kodachrome II. Many considered it an amateur film; until Kodachrome 64 came out; in the K14 process.