Damien Symonds

I'm so sorry, I can't see those links for some reason. It's possible the photographer has their page set to only be visible to people from her own country.

I'm afraid I don't see how cloning will work by itself, since the glare is obscuring the curve of the crease of the upper eyelids. It will take some very careful copying/pasting/moving/rotating/masking of the creases from the outer part of each lid.

Gosh mate, if that's the worst of it, don't lose any sleep over it. Just clone away the worst little bits, then move on.

Yeah! Now, I'd add some shadow to the very bottom of her shoe. It's too light compared to the dark shadow of the leaf immediately below it.

The girl is a bit too dark, I think.

@Kristi Lesnik? How did you go?

Unless you are in desperate circumstances, ditch it. Good sharpening would be able to make a passable print out of it, but if hung next to a genuinely well-focused shot, it would be apparent.

Well ... don't you think so? The grain of the canvas is the vexing issue here, in my opinion. Of course. With the right sharpening.

The trick, I've found, is to photograph it in dim light. The painting doesn't move, so you can leave the shutter open for as long as it takes. You need to be out of any direct light at all. This is partially relevant: http://www.damiensymonds.net/2010/10/tips-for-photographing-old-photos-for.html

Oh, that's because you haven't taken The Sharpening Class yet. Ok, how did you light the painting when you were photographing it?

And when you enlarge, you feel the grain becomes offensive to the viewer's eye?

So, what we're looking at there is the grain of the canvas on which the piece was painted, is that right?

Hi Lynda, may I see a 100% crop?

Hmmm ... well, let's start with the simple option. Try using Edit>Transform>Perspective, and see how you like it: It definitely is flattering for Dad, it makes his waist thinner and his chest broader.

It's just passable.

Of course I can't see the noise, because you haven't showed me a 100% crop. But I can definitely see that no, the white balance is still wrong. Please please PLEASE take The Raw Class. Your life will be plagued by what you think are "skin tone problems" until you know how to edit raw files properly. DO NOT USE PORTRAITURE. Not for now. Get your raw processing mastered first.

I can't stress this enough. Almost ALL skin tone problems come from incorrect white balance, and that's definitely the case here.

No, that looks the same as before.

Please change your life: http://www.damiensymonds.net/bridge-30-day-challenge

It looks fabulous, well done! It will be the subject of "The Advanced Levels Class" in the future.

Great! So is it all fixed now?

So sorry about my delayed response. I had family visiting. Yes, saving the raw file as a jpeg is exactly the right way to do it. But I need you to do the raw processing first (white balance, exposure, etc). Go ahead and do that, then save it as a jpeg again and upload for me. By the way, never forget the noise removal as part of your raw processing.

Hi Sharon, yes, I can definitely help you with this. Did you shoot it in raw format?

I'm so sorry Holly, I can't find a way to do it I've moved the post into the GenDisc area, to see if anyone else has any ideas.

Since it's extremely mild, just use the "Colour Fix" layer from The Handyman Method.