Damien Symonds

This is the best I can manage for the second one. I realise it's not very good. Download the PSD file

Darn, I was afraid of that. The first one you posted should be fairly straightforward, because she's looking directly at the camera, and none of the flare is obscuring similar parts of both eyes. Therefore, it should be easy enough to copy and flip one eye to the other. Have you done that before? Let me know if you need guidance. But the second one is tricky, because she's at an angle, so copying/flipping isn't an option. I'll have a play with that one and see what's possible.

Hi Joyce, do you have many of these to fix? Just this one, or others as well?

I'm pretty sure it's just this: Download the PSD

Ok, first things first: https://www.damiensymonds.net/png-file-format

Hi Melissa, could you post both the files here?

On my PC, it's "Keyboard Shortcuts" in the Edit menu. It might be the same on your Mac, or it might be in the Photoshop menu.

I agree that it's not perfect, but it'll sharpen up ok, don't worry.

No trouble! I enjoy this kind of question. If you try it on other photos, can you show us? Needless to say, if you fiddle with the sliders on the top layer, you'll get different colour effects. The possibilities are endless.

Download my PSD First, I duplicated the Background layer twice, and ran High Pass filter on both of them - first broad, and second narrow. This brings out the detail a bit. It also creates halos, but since those were in the example photo you linked too, I figured it was ok - part of the style. Then a Levels layer for an aggressive vignette. And finally another Levels layer for the hazy look. Make sure you look at all of the channels in this layer.

No, no, not at all. I'll upload the PSD so you can see what I did. Stand by ...

It's possible you'll need to do this: https://www.damiensymonds.net/2013/10/how-to-properly-re-install-spyder.html

120 is always too high, and 100 is often too high as well. 70 is often very good. How's the print match, brightness-wise?

@shanecusack? Any thoughts?

Oh gee, that's rough. Still, I don't think there's any benefit in getting more new prints. Just find as many old ones as you can.

No no, you don't need to send off for new prints again!!!!!! The prints you have are fine.

I think the prints are right. I'm seeing cream behind your son, and everything does look slightly yellow/green. But I'm concerned about this: Surely you have some others as well? Some older ones?

Oh Miranda, I know you're hoping I'll have some magic trick, but I really don't, sorry This will require careful cloning, and a LOT of time and patience. Before you start, do this first.

Unfortunately your photo is missing the really charismatic clouds that make the other photo so good, but how is this?

Would it help me see it if you posted some 100% crops?

Hi Jennifer, there is no pixelation visible here. Where are you seeing it, exactly?

You'd hope that a calibrator would last for at least three years. Some may last a heck of a lot longer than that, but eventually they might be made out-of-date by software upgrades (eg Operating Systems). I haven't heard of one whose reliability has faded gradually. Usually they just stop working.

100 is definitely too high. 70 is fine.

The 11:15 thing.

Please hurry. You'll kick yourself over any images you send to people without that knowledge. No, this is really bad. Please read this again.