How does one reveal a section of a photo that was painted over?

[Doryan]

How does one reveal a section of a photo that was painted over?

Basically, what I’m asking is that if it’s possible to reveal the original image data that was behind the portion that has been concealed. In this particular example it was marked with black paint, but I guess the color wouldn't really matter.

 

[toltec]

The short answer is, you can't.

 

You will have to recreate the "hidden" area from scratch, or by duplicating from another area. Maybe using the Clone tool. 

 

It can sometimes help if you can copy an area from another image, or images, and make one. Like Frankenstein.

[Alfred]

7 hours ago, toltec said:

It can sometimes help if you can copy an area from another image, or images, and make one. Like Frankenstein.

 

I don’t think Dr Frankenstein copied areas from one image to another to create his monster, but we know what you meant!

[Doryan]

Dear "toltec" and "Alfred" - Thanks to both of you for making me laugh. However, I'm kind of sad that this can't be done. I really did think the mighty power behind Affinity Photo could do this sort of magic trick. But I guess once the pixel information is damaged, it's gone.

I didn't necessarily want to become Dr. Frankenstein, I merely wanted to be able to unveil hidden information covered with paint marks and the like. Thanks at any rate.

[firstdefence]

You can recreate it with a bit of effort, your first step is to clone out as much of the black as possible: Tweaked a bit.afphoto

 

 

I don't suppose you got a licence plate?

[Doryan]

firstdefence - Thanks for being my first line of defense in terms of "photo editing" issues. I indeed ended up buying the "Snagit" software by TechSmith. However, it is proving to be very unfortunate for the local authorities, because through the use of the tool's "panoramic" screen capture, I have been able to create evidence that otherwise would have been out of my reach. I'm very grateful for that recommendation of yours. Definitely, it has provided me with an invaluable tool to fight corruption.

 

Anyway, going back to this particular question, no, sorry. I don't the original image nor license plate number. This photo was a random picture I found on the Internet, and it was already marked over with that particular black stroke/paint.

However, being able to regenerate any image that has suffered this type of modifcation edition, would prove to be rather useful. In this particular example, it would aid to find out whether the car has fines attached to it, since with the license number you can find out that information. Well, I guess one would still need the registration number of the vehicle, but none the less, it information one needs to take into consideration prior to purchasing a car offer than may sound too good to be true.

At any rate, there's probably more good uses one could get out of knowing how to implement this particular technique, if it's even possible.

 

Thanks again!

[firstdefence]

Sometimes you can get pixel detail out that looks hidden, this is a poor image so its impossible to get the whole licence plate but by adjusting the gamma in the Levels adjustment you can see maybe 2 of the numbers, probably a 5 and either a 6 or an 8. Sometimes you can use the design of the licence plate to focus in as America has some pretty neat licence plate designs with more than just licence plate number info on them.

 

[IanSG]

On 4/28/2018 at 4:58 AM, Doryan said:

How does one reveal a section of a photo that was painter over?

The problem is that "painting over" is a misleading way of thinking about it.  If you paint over something, the original is still there but it's been hidden.  What's happening here is more like tearing bits out of a book, destroying them, and then replacing them with something completely different.  If it's only a few letters that have been replaced you might be able to work it out e.g. cn y rd ths?  - if entire pages have been replaced there's no way of working out what was there originally. 

[carl123]

Painting over something is not always an effective way of destroying an image

The attached famous person would appear unrecognisable but it's quite easy to reveal who they are if you know what to do.

Try it.

 

[Alfred]

You’re teasing us, Carl. It’s perfectly obvious who that is!

 

[toltec]

What the police do sometimes from their CCTV cameras is turn the image into a negative

 

It doesn't always work though 

[- S -]

5 hours ago, carl123 said:

Painting over something is not always an effective way of destroying an image

The attached famous person would appear unrecognisable but it's quite easy to reveal who they are if you know what to do.

Try it.

Is it Lee?  

[toltec]

Very good

 

Is it that Frankenstein fella I mentioned above? If so, you haven't reproduced the bolt very well 

[toltec]

Bet you can't do it with this one.

 

[MEB]

Sima,

It's Hugh Laurie from Dr House (nice touch the obama in the filename). This was the image used:

 

[- S -]

2 hours ago, MEB said:

Sima,

It's Hugh Laurie from Dr House (nice touch the obama in the filename). This was the image used:

<Image Snipped>

Nice one!

 

[JimmyJack]

Edit: Never mind, too late.

[carl123]

@Sima

Nice work revealing the image - not sure what technique you used as your AP application screenshot does not give many clues

But there is another way, which I will reveal tomorrow morning if no one discovers it

just in case others are still working on this

[dutchshader]

it took me a while, the result:

[Doryan]

9 hours ago, IanSG said:

The problem is that "painting over" is a misleading way of thinking about it.  If you paint over something, the original is still there but it's been hidden.  What's happening here is more like tearing bits out of a book, destroying them, and then replacing them with something completely different.  If it's only a few letters that have been replaced you might be able to work it out e.g. cn y rd ths?  - if entire pages have been replaced there's no way of working out what was there originally. 

IanSG - You're right. However, since I didn't do the editing, I wouldn't know what procedure they utilized to conceal the image information. More than likely most people that hide information about their pictures, like in my example, are probably not too savvy about photo editing software. I bet they just use something along the lines of "Paint" or a similar free iOS photo editing app with basic tools. But they probably manage to make it work, but I bet that prior to exporting the final image, their file still has such layer intact.

[Alfred]

1 hour ago, carl123 said:

@Sima

Nice work revealing the image - not sure what technique you used as your AP application screenshot does not give many clues

But there is another way, which I will reveal tomorrow morning if no one discovers it

just in case others are still working on this

 

If you don't know what technique @Sima used, how are you in a position to say that your way is "another way", rather than just a variant of the same method?

[Doryan]

1 hour ago, carl123 said:

@Sima

Nice work revealing the image - not sure what technique you used as your AP application screenshot does not give many clues

But there is another way, which I will reveal tomorrow morning if no one discovers it

just in case others are still working on this

carl123 - Can't wait to learn how you reveal to us how to perform this technique tomorrow. Sorry for being a "Newbie", I can't hide my profile status, so I might as well embrace it with honor.

[Doryan]

Just now, Alfred said:

 

If you don't know what technique @Sima used, how are you in a position to say that your way is "another way", rather than just a variant of the same method?

Excellent observation!

[Doryan]

1 hour ago, dutchshader said:

it took me a while, the result:

dutchshader - It would be awesome if you could share with us the method you used. Thanks in advance.

[Madame]

Sorry.. I had to try.