Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Smart DeBlur

Reply
Thread Tools

Smart DeBlur

 
 
philo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-26-2012
free download


https://github.com/Y-Vladimir/SmartDeblur/downloads
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Martin Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-27-2012
On 26/10/2012 22:50, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012.10.26 17:00 , philo wrote:
>> free download
>>
>> https://github.com/Y-Vladimir/SmartDeblur/downloads

>
> Remarkable - good to get usable out of crap, but useless for a good
> quality photo. See:
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...g-results.html


You can do better than that with the right algorithm.

But it isn't new though. The technique has been available since the
early 1980's on sufficiently powerful computers. What has changed is
that domestic PCs are now better than supercomputers of yesteryear.

http://www.maxent.co.uk/example_1.htm

Is an example of car number plate deblurring from 1980.

Also appeared in the Times about the same time.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
philo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-29-2012
On 10/27/2012 07:55 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 26/10/2012 22:50, Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2012.10.26 17:00 , philo wrote:
>>> free download
>>>
>>> https://github.com/Y-Vladimir/SmartDeblur/downloads

>>
>> Remarkable - good to get usable out of crap, but useless for a good
>> quality photo. See:
>>
>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...g-results.html
>>

>
> You can do better than that with the right algorithm.
>
> But it isn't new though. The technique has been available since the
> early 1980's on sufficiently powerful computers. What has changed is
> that domestic PCs are now better than supercomputers of yesteryear.
>
> http://www.maxent.co.uk/example_1.htm
>
> Is an example of car number plate deblurring from 1980.
>
> Also appeared in the Times about the same time.
>



I have been playing with Smart DeBlur and found it very CPU intensive
so it makes experimenting with it a bit slow. So far I have not gotten
any decent results but will keep trying.

About five years ago I got a few shots of Les Paul at the Iridium that
were a bit blurred due to slow shutter speed /low light. Obviously there
will be no opportunity for a second chance.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Martin Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-29-2012
On 29/10/2012 11:05, philo wrote:
> On 10/27/2012 07:55 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 26/10/2012 22:50, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> On 2012.10.26 17:00 , philo wrote:
>>>> free download
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/Y-Vladimir/SmartDeblur/downloads
>>>
>>> Remarkable - good to get usable out of crap, but useless for a good
>>> quality photo. See:
>>>
>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...g-results.html
>>>
>>>

>>
>> You can do better than that with the right algorithm.
>>
>> But it isn't new though. The technique has been available since the
>> early 1980's on sufficiently powerful computers. What has changed is
>> that domestic PCs are now better than supercomputers of yesteryear.
>>
>> http://www.maxent.co.uk/example_1.htm
>>
>> Is an example of car number plate deblurring from 1980.
>>
>> Also appeared in the Times about the same time.

>
> I have been playing with Smart DeBlur and found it very CPU intensive
> so it makes experimenting with it a bit slow. So far I have not gotten
> any decent results but will keep trying.


Such algorithms are typically 50-200x slower than unsharp masking.

> About five years ago I got a few shots of Les Paul at the Iridium that
> were a bit blurred due to slow shutter speed /low light. Obviously there
> will be no opportunity for a second chance.


Look for a specular highlight near the subject you want to get in focus
and isolate that as the trial point spread function. Also work on the
smallest image you can get away with to practice eg 128x128.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
 
Reply With Quote
 
philo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-29-2012
On 10/29/2012 09:45 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 29/10/2012 11:05, philo wrote:
>> On 10/27/2012 07:55 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> On 26/10/2012 22:50, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>> On 2012.10.26 17:00 , philo wrote:
>>>>> free download
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/Y-Vladimir/SmartDeblur/downloads
>>>>Times about the same time.

>>
>> I have been playing with Smart DeBlur and found it very CPU intensive
>> so it makes experimenting with it a bit slow. So far I have not gotten
>> any decent results but will keep trying.

>
> Such algorithms are typically 50-200x slower than unsharp masking.
>
>> About five years ago I got a few shots of Les Paul at the Iridium that
>> were a bit blurred due to slow shutter speed /low light. Obviously there
>> will be no opportunity for a second chance.

>
> Look for a specular highlight near the subject you want to get in focus
> and isolate that as the trial point spread function. Also work on the
> smallest image you can get away with to practice eg 128x128.
>



OK will do
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-29-2012
philo <" philo"@privacy.net> wrote:

>On 10/29/2012 09:45 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 29/10/2012 11:05, philo wrote:
>>> On 10/27/2012 07:55 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>> On 26/10/2012 22:50, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>> On 2012.10.26 17:00 , philo wrote:
>>>>>> free download
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/Y-Vladimir/SmartDeblur/downloads
>>>>>Times about the same time.
>>>
>>> I have been playing with Smart DeBlur and found it very CPU intensive
>>> so it makes experimenting with it a bit slow. So far I have not gotten
>>> any decent results but will keep trying.

>>
>> Such algorithms are typically 50-200x slower than unsharp masking.
>>
>>> About five years ago I got a few shots of Les Paul at the Iridium that
>>> were a bit blurred due to slow shutter speed /low light. Obviously there
>>> will be no opportunity for a second chance.

>>
>> Look for a specular highlight near the subject you want to get in focus
>> and isolate that as the trial point spread function. Also work on the
>> smallest image you can get away with to practice eg 128x128.
>>

>
>
>OK will do



Perhaps it would have been better if philo had tested this software
*before* recommending it on here?

 
Reply With Quote
 
Gordon Freeman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-30-2012
Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> On 26/10/2012 22:50, Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2012.10.26 17:00 , philo wrote:
>>> free download
>>>
>>> https://github.com/Y-Vladimir/SmartDeblur/downloads

>>
>> Remarkable - good to get usable out of crap, but useless for a good
>> quality photo. See:
>>
>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...6/SmartDeblur-

Download-app-blurs-fuzzy-images-amazing-results.html
>
> You can do better than that with the right algorithm.
>
> But it isn't new though.



A few years ago I tried out a deconvolution program, Unshake, which
sharpens not only out of focus stuff but other also undoes various types of
camera shake and motion blur. You can still get it at
http://www.zen147963.zen.co.uk/
which also has articles explaining the principles very well.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-31-2012
philo <" philo"@privacy.net> wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 09:45 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 29/10/2012 11:05, philo wrote:
>>> On 10/27/2012 07:55 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>> On 26/10/2012 22:50, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>> On 2012.10.26 17:00 , philo wrote:
>>>>>> free download
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/Y-Vladimir/SmartDeblur/downloads
>>>>> Times about the same time.
>>>
>>> I have been playing with Smart DeBlur and found it very CPU intensive
>>> so it makes experimenting with it a bit slow. So far I have not gotten
>>> any decent results but will keep trying.

>>
>> Such algorithms are typically 50-200x slower than unsharp masking.
>>
>>> About five years ago I got a few shots of Les Paul at the Iridium that
>>> were a bit blurred due to slow shutter speed /low light. Obviously there
>>> will be no opportunity for a second chance.

>>
>> Look for a specular highlight near the subject you want to get in focus
>> and isolate that as the trial point spread function. Also work on the
>> smallest image you can get away with to practice eg 128x128.
>>

>
>
> OK will do


Any apps that will do the same on an iPhone?
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2012
On 10/29/2012 10:45 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 29/10/2012 11:05, philo wrote:
>> On 10/27/2012 07:55 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> On 26/10/2012 22:50, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>> On 2012.10.26 17:00 , philo wrote:
>>>>> free download
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/Y-Vladimir/SmartDeblur/downloads
>>>>
>>>> Remarkable - good to get usable out of crap, but useless for a good
>>>> quality photo. See:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...g-results.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> You can do better than that with the right algorithm.
>>>
>>> But it isn't new though. The technique has been available since the
>>> early 1980's on sufficiently powerful computers. What has changed is
>>> that domestic PCs are now better than supercomputers of yesteryear.
>>>
>>> http://www.maxent.co.uk/example_1.htm
>>>
>>> Is an example of car number plate deblurring from 1980.
>>>
>>> Also appeared in the Times about the same time.

>>
>> I have been playing with Smart DeBlur and found it very CPU intensive
>> so it makes experimenting with it a bit slow. So far I have not gotten
>> any decent results but will keep trying.

>
> Such algorithms are typically 50-200x slower than unsharp masking.
>
>> About five years ago I got a few shots of Les Paul at the Iridium that
>> were a bit blurred due to slow shutter speed /low light. Obviously there
>> will be no opportunity for a second chance.

>
> Look for a specular highlight near the subject you want to get in focus
> and isolate that as the trial point spread function. Also work on the
> smallest image you can get away with to practice eg 128x128.
>


I found that if you set feathering high, it runs faster. As soon as I
get power back I would try getting the best image possible with
feathering at factory level. Then, as a second step reduce feathering to
zero.



--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Smart Pointers: Is there something similar to smart pointers in C? MotoK C Programming 59 09-15-2006 07:03 PM
Problems with EAP-TLS with smart cards jr Wireless Networking 1 06-23-2006 09:20 PM
Smart Card Certificate Logon and Smart Card Wireless EAP-TLS erha Wireless Networking 0 05-19-2005 01:40 AM
Is WPS compatible with Smart client as defined in WISPr guidelines nsmurthy Wireless Networking 0 08-13-2004 10:23 AM
trade 64mb smart media for 16mb smart media cards wjva Digital Photography 1 08-20-2003 08:30 PM



Advertisments