Restore and possible date, please

[Sue from Southend]

This lady might be my 2x gt grandmother, Matilda who died in 1897. Does the photo look about right for early/mid 1890's?

And can anyone make her a bit clearer please?

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc105/suecant/MatildaHughesformerlyWarrenneePiercyc1895.jpg

Thanks

[Rachel]

Hiya
Do you have the original photo ?

[Sue from Southend]

Yes, that is scanned from an original. It's one of those made into a post card.

[Rachel]

OK
Can you guess the next question ?




Please can you either rescan it at a resolution of 300 DPI and increase the scale to 150% ~ or scan at 600 DPI

If the file size is too big, then I'll PM you my email address so you need not go though Photobucket

My computer says the resolution is at only 72 DPI.


Postcard backs are also useful for dates
If it has a line down the centre, so you put the address one side, then I believe that means it's 1902 or newer

[Sue from Southend]

Are these any better? I thought that I had increased the resolution the first time but maybe I didn't :rolleyes:

I've done one in "colour" and one in grayscale - don't know if that makes any difference.

The postcard information is interesting even if it means that this lady is not Matilda :( I'm trying to think who else she might be!

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc105/suecant/001-2.jpg



http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc105/suecant/002-1.jpg

[Rachel]

Hi Sue
I should have said always scan in colour as this retains more information ~ you can see that the file size of the RGB scan is larger (780 KB)

Unfortunately they are still at 72 DPI and pixellated when enlarged.


I'll PM you my email address so you can try sending it to me directly

[Rachel]

A quick clean using one of the images on here (pixellated)

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o228/rachelscand/ZSuesouthend.jpg

[Sue from Southend]

Ooh that's a lot better Rachel. However I have just sent you an email. The photo attached to that may be better to work with (or not :rolleyes:)

I think that it may be a photo of Matilda's daughter Mary Ann, I forgot to allow for the fact that 45 yr olds looked a lot older then they do now :d

[Rachel]

Ooh that's a lot better Rachel. However I have just sent you an email. The photo attached to that may be better to work with (or not :rolleyes:)

I think that it may be a photo of Matilda's daughter Mary Ann, I forgot to allow for the fact that 45 yr olds looked a lot older then they do now :d


The e-mailed scan is FABulous ~ have replied :)

Shall I put it on here via Photobucket in case anyone else wants to play ?

[Sue from Southend]

I'm glad it worked Rachel.

If you think anyone else would like a bash please feel free to post it. I still don't know what I did wrong with the earlier posts - I added them via Photobucket but possibly not the right way (a bit like Eric Morecambe - all the right notes but not in the right order!!)

[Rachel]

I'm glad it worked Rachel.

If you think anyone else would like a bash please feel free to post it. I still don't know what I did wrong with the earlier posts - I added them via Photobucket but possibly not the right way (a bit like Eric Morecambe - all the right notes but not in the right order!!)

It could be that your Pbucket file size option is not set to the maximum

Since they changed the layout I've not been able to figure out where to alter it.


OK here it is at good size
Please note that because the e-mailed file size was huge, I resampled and resized it before uploading to Pbucket ~ so ignore whatever it says about DPI etc. (Sue scanned it at 600 DPI)

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o228/rachelscand/ZSuesouthendweb.jpg

[Rachel]

2 restored versions

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o228/rachelscand/ZSuesouthendBWweb.jpg

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o228/rachelscand/ZSuesouthendsepiaweb.jpg

[Janet]

Wow, Rachel.

[Sue from Southend]

Wow indeed! You can see all the lace and trimmings on the dress now. And I see what you mean about the bobbles - no accounting for taste or fashion is there?? Thank you so much Rachel, you really are a star and it is much appreciated

I'm now in a quandary about who she is - the two photos below are of Mary Ann Webster b1862 at different ages. Do you think they are the same person as the lady with the bobbles?

circa 1907 - the small child was b1903. We're looking at the older woman seated.

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc105/suecant/Websterfamilyc1908.jpg





circa 1939

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc105/suecant/WmandMaryAnnWebster1940ish.jpg

[Rachel]

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o228/rachelscand/ZSuesouthend3facesweb.jpg

[Margaret in Burton]

Looking at the three pics Rachel has put together: First two maybe, similar eyes. The third one's eyes are very different.

[borobabs]

I keep looking at there noses , they do seem similar but if they are the same pass

[Sue from Southend]

Thanks for putting the three together Rachel - it does make the comparison easier. The two "newer" photos ie the 1st and 3rd ones are definitely the same woman, my mother's grandmother who she lived with for 15yrs and identified by her some years ago. The one in the middle (bobble lady) might be someone else, possibly her paternal grandmother. At some point Mum must have said that this was a Warren (Mary Ann's maiden name) as it's pencilled on the back but it looks to have been taken at a similar date as the family group and they are clearly very different, in build as well as features.

Sadly I don't think I'll ever know for sure now. Thanks for looking, Margaret and Babs

[Rachel]

The middle lady has very small eyes ~ slightly 'piggy'.

She would seem to have fuller lips than the other 2, although it's difficult to tell.
Also, I'd say her forehead looks more square.

I'm wondering if she had light red or sandy hair as you can't detect eyelashes


Sue, do you want the restored pic in colour ?

[Sue from Southend]

I'm inclined to say don't worry about a colour version Rachel mainly because I can't pin down who she is and I wouldn't want you to waste your time. But thank you for the offer and for the great work that you've done on it already.

[Rachel]

I'm inclined to say don't worry about a colour version Rachel mainly because I can't pin down who she is and I wouldn't want you to waste your time. But thank you for the offer and for the great work that you've done on it already.


OK
Might do one sometime this week anyway, if you have no objections, because it's an interesting one and I'd like to see how the different leaves look.

It's obviously some kind of rampant Tropaeolum covering most of the ground and about to grab her by the ankles ~ can't identify the other stuff :confused:

There's only about one flower as far as I can tell, which might indicate the soil conditions and help with the location .... a bit of a longshot

[Sue from Southend]

The location is almost certainly somewhere in the East End of London, probably Bethnal Green. All my ancestors were living there at that time.

Feel free to play as much you want - I didn't want you to waste your time but if it's something you're really interested in, go for it!