Re: Possible new feature for next Photoshop

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by PeterN, Oct 12, 2011.

  1. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    On 10/10/2011 11:47 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    > It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a
    > future Photoshop release.
    > < http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-forever >
    >


    timing is everything. I was shooting long exposures just after low
    slack, and was so caught op in the beauty of long exposures that I
    forgot the boats and floating docks moved. I have a glass bay with
    blurry ships and docks. I will just have to wait for the confluence of
    low tide, sunrise and slight fog.


    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Oct 12, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. PeterN

    tony cooper Guest

    On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:26:04 -0400, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    >On 10/10/2011 11:47 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    >> It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a
    >> future Photoshop release.
    >> < http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-forever >
    >>

    >
    >timing is everything. I was shooting long exposures just after low
    >slack, and was so caught op in the beauty of long exposures that I
    >forgot the boats and floating docks moved. I have a glass bay with
    >blurry ships and docks. I will just have to wait for the confluence of
    >low tide, sunrise and slight fog.


    The latest theme for our camera club's monthly competition was
    "Beautiful Blur". Evidently, *deliberate* blur in an otherwise good
    photo is difficult to do.

    There were about half the number of entries as usual, and many of
    these were "zoom blur" and your kind of photo: abstract.

    A few automobiles and a few bicycles (one very good one taken during a
    bicycle race). The usual waterfalls taken at slow exposure, but this
    type of image has become a cliche.

    My entry received the lowest score I've ever received in a
    competition: 70. The judges said it didn't have enough blur.

    It wasn't a good photo for the theme anyway. I came up with it the
    last day and shot it in my garage a few hours before the deadline. I
    couldn't think of a good subject. (We submit online)

    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-xtGq2Sq/0/XL/2011-10-05-1-XL.jpg








    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Oct 12, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    On 10/12/2011 12:43 AM, tony cooper wrote:
    > On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:26:04 -0400, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> On 10/10/2011 11:47 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    >>> It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a
    >>> future Photoshop release.
    >>> < http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-forever>
    >>>

    >>
    >> timing is everything. I was shooting long exposures just after low
    >> slack, and was so caught op in the beauty of long exposures that I
    >> forgot the boats and floating docks moved. I have a glass bay with
    >> blurry ships and docks. I will just have to wait for the confluence of
    >> low tide, sunrise and slight fog.

    >
    > The latest theme for our camera club's monthly competition was
    > "Beautiful Blur". Evidently, *deliberate* blur in an otherwise good
    > photo is difficult to do.
    >
    > There were about half the number of entries as usual, and many of
    > these were "zoom blur" and your kind of photo: abstract.
    >
    > A few automobiles and a few bicycles (one very good one taken during a
    > bicycle race). The usual waterfalls taken at slow exposure, but this
    > type of image has become a cliche.
    >
    > My entry received the lowest score I've ever received in a
    > competition: 70. The judges said it didn't have enough blur.
    >
    > It wasn't a good photo for the theme anyway. I came up with it the
    > last day and shot it in my garage a few hours before the deadline. I
    > couldn't think of a good subject. (We submit online)
    >
    > http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-xtGq2Sq/0/XL/2011-10-05-1-XL.jpg
    >
    >


    Well, it's got good color saturation. Not y0our best work. A moving
    pendulum would have worked better.


    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Oct 12, 2011
    #3
  4. PeterN

    tony cooper Guest

    On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:40:55 -0400, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    >On 10/12/2011 12:43 AM, tony cooper wrote:
    >> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:26:04 -0400, PeterN
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 10/10/2011 11:47 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    >>>> It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a
    >>>> future Photoshop release.
    >>>> < http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-forever>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> timing is everything. I was shooting long exposures just after low
    >>> slack, and was so caught op in the beauty of long exposures that I
    >>> forgot the boats and floating docks moved. I have a glass bay with
    >>> blurry ships and docks. I will just have to wait for the confluence of
    >>> low tide, sunrise and slight fog.

    >>
    >> The latest theme for our camera club's monthly competition was
    >> "Beautiful Blur". Evidently, *deliberate* blur in an otherwise good
    >> photo is difficult to do.
    >>
    >> There were about half the number of entries as usual, and many of
    >> these were "zoom blur" and your kind of photo: abstract.
    >>
    >> A few automobiles and a few bicycles (one very good one taken during a
    >> bicycle race). The usual waterfalls taken at slow exposure, but this
    >> type of image has become a cliche.
    >>
    >> My entry received the lowest score I've ever received in a
    >> competition: 70. The judges said it didn't have enough blur.
    >>
    >> It wasn't a good photo for the theme anyway. I came up with it the
    >> last day and shot it in my garage a few hours before the deadline. I
    >> couldn't think of a good subject. (We submit online)
    >>
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-xtGq2Sq/0/XL/2011-10-05-1-XL.jpg
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Well, it's got good color saturation. Not y0our best work. A moving
    >pendulum would have worked better.


    Sure, but I don't have a moving pendulum around the house to
    photograph.

    I was very close to going to a pet store and buying a Siamese Fighting
    Fish in a small round bowl to see if I could photograph that with a
    blur of movement. Didn't do it, though.

    However, one of the other entries was a straight-down shot of a koi
    pond. It was good, but not great.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Oct 12, 2011
    #4
  5. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    On 10/12/2011 9:54 AM, tony cooper wrote:
    > On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:40:55 -0400, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> On 10/12/2011 12:43 AM, tony cooper wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:26:04 -0400, PeterN
    >>> <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On 10/10/2011 11:47 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    >>>>> It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a
    >>>>> future Photoshop release.
    >>>>> < http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-forever>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> timing is everything. I was shooting long exposures just after low
    >>>> slack, and was so caught op in the beauty of long exposures that I
    >>>> forgot the boats and floating docks moved. I have a glass bay with
    >>>> blurry ships and docks. I will just have to wait for the confluence of
    >>>> low tide, sunrise and slight fog.
    >>>
    >>> The latest theme for our camera club's monthly competition was
    >>> "Beautiful Blur". Evidently, *deliberate* blur in an otherwise good
    >>> photo is difficult to do.
    >>>
    >>> There were about half the number of entries as usual, and many of
    >>> these were "zoom blur" and your kind of photo: abstract.
    >>>
    >>> A few automobiles and a few bicycles (one very good one taken during a
    >>> bicycle race). The usual waterfalls taken at slow exposure, but this
    >>> type of image has become a cliche.
    >>>
    >>> My entry received the lowest score I've ever received in a
    >>> competition: 70. The judges said it didn't have enough blur.
    >>>
    >>> It wasn't a good photo for the theme anyway. I came up with it the
    >>> last day and shot it in my garage a few hours before the deadline. I
    >>> couldn't think of a good subject. (We submit online)
    >>>
    >>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-xtGq2Sq/0/XL/2011-10-05-1-XL.jpg
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Well, it's got good color saturation. Not y0our best work. A moving
    >> pendulum would have worked better.

    >
    > Sure, but I don't have a moving pendulum around the house to
    > photograph.
    >
    > I was very close to going to a pet store and buying a Siamese Fighting
    > Fish in a small round bowl to see if I could photograph that with a
    > blur of movement. Didn't do it, though.
    >
    > However, one of the other entries was a straight-down shot of a koi
    > pond. It was good, but not great.
    >
    >


    As you pointed out: deliberate motion blur is not easy. My own suspicion
    is that is why most CC judges like frozen objects. My bird images with
    motion blur in the wings usually receive a comment that the wings are
    blurry. Yet to me blurred wings can be a much nicer image.

    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Oct 12, 2011
    #5
  6. PeterN

    tony cooper Guest

    On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:27:48 +1300, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    >>>>> The latest theme for our camera club's monthly competition was
    >>>>> "Beautiful Blur". Evidently, *deliberate* blur in an otherwise good
    >>>>> photo is difficult to do.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> There were about half the number of entries as usual, and many of
    >>>>> these were "zoom blur" and your kind of photo: abstract.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> A few automobiles and a few bicycles (one very good one taken during a
    >>>>> bicycle race). The usual waterfalls taken at slow exposure, but this
    >>>>> type of image has become a cliche.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> My entry received the lowest score I've ever received in a
    >>>>> competition: 70. The judges said it didn't have enough blur.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> It wasn't a good photo for the theme anyway. I came up with it the
    >>>>> last day and shot it in my garage a few hours before the deadline. I
    >>>>> couldn't think of a good subject. (We submit online)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-xtGq2Sq/0/XL/2011-10-05-1-XL.jpg
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Well, it's got good color saturation. Not y0our best work. A moving
    >>>> pendulum would have worked better.
    >>>
    >>> Sure, but I don't have a moving pendulum around the house to
    >>> photograph.
    >>>
    >>> I was very close to going to a pet store and buying a Siamese Fighting
    >>> Fish in a small round bowl to see if I could photograph that with a
    >>> blur of movement. Didn't do it, though.
    >>>
    >>> However, one of the other entries was a straight-down shot of a koi
    >>> pond. It was good, but not great.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>As you pointed out: deliberate motion blur is not easy. My own suspicion
    >>is that is why most CC judges like frozen objects. My bird images with
    >>motion blur in the wings usually receive a comment that the wings are
    >>blurry. Yet to me blurred wings can be a much nicer image.

    >
    >You want motion blur?
    >
    >I got motion blur.
    >
    >See first http://dl.dropbox.com/u/31088803/DSC_2254.jpg
    >
    >and then http://dl.dropbox.com/u/31088803/DSC_2256.jpg
    >

    Great subject, but you wouldn't have fared any better than I did. The
    judges confused most of us by wanting more blur in some photos and
    more sharpness in other photos. What they wanted was an image where
    part of the subject is sharp and part is blurred.

    The photos they graded high were images of something like a bicycle
    with the rider very sharp but the spokes blurred. Some of the "zoom
    blur" shots fared well, but they were shots where the blur was created
    in-camera and not in Photoshop.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Oct 12, 2011
    #6
  7. David J Taylor, Oct 13, 2011
    #7
  8. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    On 10/12/2011 6:45 PM, tony cooper wrote:
    > On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:27:48 +1300, Eric Stevens
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>>>>> The latest theme for our camera club's monthly competition was
    >>>>>> "Beautiful Blur". Evidently, *deliberate* blur in an otherwise good
    >>>>>> photo is difficult to do.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> There were about half the number of entries as usual, and many of
    >>>>>> these were "zoom blur" and your kind of photo: abstract.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> A few automobiles and a few bicycles (one very good one taken during a
    >>>>>> bicycle race). The usual waterfalls taken at slow exposure, but this
    >>>>>> type of image has become a cliche.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> My entry received the lowest score I've ever received in a
    >>>>>> competition: 70. The judges said it didn't have enough blur.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> It wasn't a good photo for the theme anyway. I came up with it the
    >>>>>> last day and shot it in my garage a few hours before the deadline. I
    >>>>>> couldn't think of a good subject. (We submit online)
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-xtGq2Sq/0/XL/2011-10-05-1-XL.jpg
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Well, it's got good color saturation. Not y0our best work. A moving
    >>>>> pendulum would have worked better.
    >>>>
    >>>> Sure, but I don't have a moving pendulum around the house to
    >>>> photograph.
    >>>>
    >>>> I was very close to going to a pet store and buying a Siamese Fighting
    >>>> Fish in a small round bowl to see if I could photograph that with a
    >>>> blur of movement. Didn't do it, though.
    >>>>
    >>>> However, one of the other entries was a straight-down shot of a koi
    >>>> pond. It was good, but not great.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> As you pointed out: deliberate motion blur is not easy. My own suspicion
    >>> is that is why most CC judges like frozen objects. My bird images with
    >>> motion blur in the wings usually receive a comment that the wings are
    >>> blurry. Yet to me blurred wings can be a much nicer image.

    >>
    >> You want motion blur?
    >>
    >> I got motion blur.
    >>
    >> See first http://dl.dropbox.com/u/31088803/DSC_2254.jpg
    >>
    >> and then http://dl.dropbox.com/u/31088803/DSC_2256.jpg
    >>

    > Great subject, but you wouldn't have fared any better than I did. The
    > judges confused most of us by wanting more blur in some photos and
    > more sharpness in other photos. What they wanted was an image where
    > part of the subject is sharp and part is blurred.
    >
    > The photos they graded high were images of something like a bicycle
    > with the rider very sharp but the spokes blurred. Some of the "zoom
    > blur" shots fared well, but they were shots where the blur was created
    > in-camera and not in Photoshop.
    >


    I was thinking of you last night. Someone submitted an image of a small
    boy staring at a school of koi. The boy was tack sharp while there was a
    bit of blur in the koi. The judge commented that he could not see the
    boy's face. Watcha gonna do. (Not my image.)

    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Oct 15, 2011
    #8
  9. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    On 10/12/2011 8:11 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
    > On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:45:52 -0400, tony cooper
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:27:48 +1300, Eric Stevens
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>>>>> The latest theme for our camera club's monthly competition was
    >>>>>>> "Beautiful Blur". Evidently, *deliberate* blur in an otherwise good
    >>>>>>> photo is difficult to do.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> There were about half the number of entries as usual, and many of
    >>>>>>> these were "zoom blur" and your kind of photo: abstract.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> A few automobiles and a few bicycles (one very good one taken during a
    >>>>>>> bicycle race). The usual waterfalls taken at slow exposure, but this
    >>>>>>> type of image has become a cliche.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> My entry received the lowest score I've ever received in a
    >>>>>>> competition: 70. The judges said it didn't have enough blur.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> It wasn't a good photo for the theme anyway. I came up with it the
    >>>>>>> last day and shot it in my garage a few hours before the deadline. I
    >>>>>>> couldn't think of a good subject. (We submit online)
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-xtGq2Sq/0/XL/2011-10-05-1-XL.jpg
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Well, it's got good color saturation. Not y0our best work. A moving
    >>>>>> pendulum would have worked better.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Sure, but I don't have a moving pendulum around the house to
    >>>>> photograph.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I was very close to going to a pet store and buying a Siamese Fighting
    >>>>> Fish in a small round bowl to see if I could photograph that with a
    >>>>> blur of movement. Didn't do it, though.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> However, one of the other entries was a straight-down shot of a koi
    >>>>> pond. It was good, but not great.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> As you pointed out: deliberate motion blur is not easy. My own suspicion
    >>>> is that is why most CC judges like frozen objects. My bird images with
    >>>> motion blur in the wings usually receive a comment that the wings are
    >>>> blurry. Yet to me blurred wings can be a much nicer image.
    >>>
    >>> You want motion blur?
    >>>
    >>> I got motion blur.
    >>>
    >>> See first http://dl.dropbox.com/u/31088803/DSC_2254.jpg
    >>>
    >>> and then http://dl.dropbox.com/u/31088803/DSC_2256.jpg
    >>>

    >> Great subject, but you wouldn't have fared any better than I did. The
    >> judges confused most of us by wanting more blur in some photos and
    >> more sharpness in other photos. What they wanted was an image where
    >> part of the subject is sharp and part is blurred.
    >>
    >> The photos they graded high were images of something like a bicycle
    >> with the rider very sharp but the spokes blurred. Some of the "zoom
    >> blur" shots fared well, but they were shots where the blur was created
    >> in-camera and not in Photoshop.

    >
    > How about this one then - from 50 years ago.
    > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/31088803/Ardmore Jan 1961.jpg
    >


    You did it nicely. Try a crop at the top to get rid of the white and
    about 1/3 on the left, you will get a long lean look. The car will
    appear to be even faster.



    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Oct 18, 2011
    #9
  10. PeterN

    M-M Guest

    M-M, Oct 19, 2011
    #10
  11. PeterN

    M-M Guest

    In article <>,
    Eric Stevens <> wrote:

    > On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 09:38:42 -0400, M-M <> wrote:
    >
    > >I think I have a good motion blur photo:
    > >
    > >http://www.netaxs.com/~mhmyers/cdjpgs/zlinsmoke.jpg

    >
    > That was good for 1/100 sec. My initial reaction was that it must have
    > been slower than that.


    I was panning trying to keep the airplane in the frame, so the plane was
    essentially still while the background was blurred from the camera
    movement.


    --
    m-m
    Photo Gallery:
    http://www.mhmyers.com
     
    M-M, Oct 23, 2011
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Alan Browne

    Next (the other next) Gen "DVD" storage

    Alan Browne, May 27, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    496
    Iain Laskey
    May 31, 2005
  2. Annika1980

    Best Photoshop Feature You've Never Heard Of?

    Annika1980, Dec 11, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    365
    Annika1980
    Dec 12, 2005
  3. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,010
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
  4. Trevor

    Re: Possible new feature for next Photoshop

    Trevor, Oct 11, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    253
    David J Taylor
    Oct 17, 2011
  5. Bruce

    Re: Possible new feature for next Photoshop

    Bruce, Oct 11, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    157
    Views:
    2,113
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Jan 18, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page