# Don't toss those blurred photos



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Coming soon....

Maybe a new service to offer for your clients..

Adobe shows off new 'undo photo blur' feature

Great crowd reaction.... :clap:

Likely deserved in this case and would appear finally something that needs the horsepower that's floating about these days.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Dave, I saw something about this yesterday - it only works for blur that comes from camera movement, not out-of-focus shots... and I'm unclear on how they implement their de-blurring algorithm, since they say the filter estimates the speed and direction in which the camera movement occurred. It does seem like magic...


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

pretty soon adobe will make me a decent photographer.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

MacDoc said:


> ...finally something that needs the horsepower that's floating about these days.


Knowing Adobe, however, it will have no multiprocessor nor multithread capability. 

Like most of their software now...


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Adobe would be far better served by keeping legacy versions of their software available for older computers and making sure the current versions take advantage of current hardware.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I thought quite a number of things were multi threaded as of CS4 or so in photoshop. (not sure about other programs)


----------



## Visual-Q (Dec 14, 2003)

It looks cool but I have my doubts, this may work well broadly such as sharpening blurred edges and large blocks of detail but I don't see how it could reliably reconstruct fine detail particularly where there is low contrast as the necessary data would be either too corrupted or missing entirely in a badly blurred photo.

It could work very well in very slightly blurred photos.

Who knows...


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

groovetube said:


> I thought quite a number of things were multi threaded as of CS4 or so in photoshop. (not sure about other programs)


Pieces of it are. Thing is, I'll never apply Gaussian Blur to 100 images in a batch. My biggest issue is I've never, ever been able to get more than about 250% CPU usage (out of 4 cores) in anything in Photoshop and it's usually around 100%. Sure, some of that is drive and memory related but I can get 350%+ on other applications like Noise Ninja, Photomatix Pro, PhotoZoom Pro, etc. which access hard drives too, but are true multiprocessor/multithread capable.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> Adobe would be far better served by keeping legacy versions of their software available for older computers and making sure the current versions take advantage of current hardware.


I suspect you would be better served by this scenario and not necessarily Adobe... Do you really think you have a better grasp of their bottom line than they do.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

Seems to me there is a very limited application for this specific technology.
Pretty much all the blurry pictures I have are blurry because rg\\they are out of focus, not because of camera movement and this technology does nothing for that problem.

I also find that more and more cameras can be bought with Image Stabilization (IS) which adresses the camera shake/movement issue.
I just bought a new camera a few days ago and IS was one of the features I was looking for.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Image stabilization is excellent but not always perfect either.

Here is a case that would be ideal










The camera was sitting on meter square concrete post and has full image stabilization but the falls has it's own vibration and you can see it's always in the same plane....

I think there are many situations where structural vibration could be edited out by this tech.


----------



## Guest (Oct 18, 2011)

Image Stabilization + a stationary camera (i.e. on a tripod or sitting on a flat surface) is not typically a good combination -- depending on the IS technique used. You will often end up with "drift" like this photo shows, especially if it's a gyro based IS setup.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

Canon pro bodies (1D/1DS) turn off lens IS if they're mounted on a tripod. Not sure about the prosumer ones.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

JUst bought a Canon SX130IS, I guess that's what you call a "prosumer" one......

Canon recommends to turn IS off when one uses a tripod but you have to do that manually. Sounds like the pro bodies do it automatically.


----------

