Out of focus photo

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:39:26 GMT, The Old Bloke wrote:

Path: feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!news.link pendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!pit-transit.telstra.net!new s.telstra.net!news-server.bigpond.net.au!53ab2750!not-for-ma il
From: The Old Bloke
Newsgroups: alt.graphics.photoshop
Subject: Out of focus photo
Message-ID:
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 15
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:39:26 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 58.174.162.216
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 1259397566 58.174.162.216 (Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:39:26 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:39:26 EST
Organization: BigPond Internet Services
Xref: eternal-september.org alt.graphics.photoshop:1986

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

Regards
Doug

Hi Doug,

Unfortunately, no. I’d suggest making the image available and see what some of us can do with it. If privacy is an issue, which it may well be for a family image, perhaps you could email individual copies. Based on past experience, I think the image can be improved over what you have now, using curves, and un-sharp mask to make things somewhat better.

On a more experimental (aka probably not practical) note, it *might* be possible to improve your image using a process called de-convolution. Here’s a web page demonstrating some relatively recent work in this area. The basic process consists of taking measurements of the camera properties, then using a rather hefty algorithm to reconstruct a blurred image. The Home page includes a link to some free experimental software that was used. http://www.bialith.com/Research/BARclockblur.htm
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 03:12:19 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:39:26 GMT, The Old Bloke wrote:

Path: feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!news.link pendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!pit-transit.telstra.net!new s.telstra.net!news-server.bigpond.net.au!53ab2750!not-for-ma il
From: The Old Bloke
Newsgroups: alt.graphics.photoshop
Subject: Out of focus photo
Message-ID:
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 15
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:39:26 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 58.174.162.216
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 1259397566 58.174.162.216 (Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:39:26 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:39:26 EST
Organization: BigPond Internet Services
Xref: eternal-september.org alt.graphics.photoshop:1986

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

Regards
Doug

Hi Doug,

Unfortunately, no. I’d suggest making the image available and see what some of us can do with it. If privacy is an issue, which it may well be for a family image, perhaps you could email individual copies. Based on past experience, I think the image can be improved over what you have now, using curves, and un-sharp mask to make things somewhat better.
On a more experimental (aka probably not practical) note, it *might* be possible to improve your image using a process called de-convolution. Here’s a web page demonstrating some relatively recent work in this area. The basic process consists of taking measurements of the camera properties, then using a rather hefty algorithm to reconstruct a blurred image. The Home page includes a link to some free experimental software that was used. http://www.bialith.com/Research/BARclockblur.htm

as already mentioned its pretty hard to do

http://www.focusmagic.com/ this might help but don’t expect miracles.

The Old Bloke wrote:

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

Regards
Doug

Well, the answer is YES and NO depending on how bad the original may be. I have seen some short video tutorial of the plug-in to get the idea that it may have something to do with Sharpening. But I have never done myself to have any experience to share or remembering the name of plug-in.

The Old Bloke wrote:

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

See: http://www.focusmagic.com/

(I haven’t tried it but someone I know recommends it).

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 03:12:19 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:39:26 GMT, The Old Bloke wrote:

Path: feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!news.link pendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!pit-transit.telstra.net!new s.telstra.net!news-server.bigpond.net.au!53ab2750!not-for-ma il
From: The Old Bloke
Newsgroups: alt.graphics.photoshop
Subject: Out of focus photo
Message-ID:
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 15
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:39:26 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 58.174.162.216
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 1259397566 58.174.162.216 (Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:39:26 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:39:26 EST
Organization: BigPond Internet Services
Xref: eternal-september.org alt.graphics.photoshop:1986

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

Regards
Doug

Hi Doug,

Unfortunately, no. I’d suggest making the image available and see what some of us can do with it. If privacy is an issue, which it may well be for a family image, perhaps you could email individual copies. Based on past experience, I think the image can be improved over what you have now, using curves, and un-sharp mask to make things somewhat better.
On a more experimental (aka probably not practical) note, it *might* be possible to improve your image using a process called de-convolution. Here’s a web page demonstrating some relatively recent work in this area. The basic process consists of taking measurements of the camera properties, then using a rather hefty algorithm to reconstruct a blurred image. The Home page includes a link to some free experimental software that was used. http://www.bialith.com/Research/BARclockblur.htm

Mike, I have emailed the photo to you.

I hope you can help.

Regards
Doug

"The Old Bloke" wrote in message

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

Regards
Doug

Depends what sort of blur you’re talking about, as there are several types.

If it’s lens blurring caused by a poorly focused camera, you can duplicate the layer in photoshop, run a high pass filter on it and set the resulting layer to "Overlay" blend mode.
This will detect and enhance all the edge contrasts in the image. It won’t increase the sharpness, but it will give the illusion that it has.

If it’s motion blur caused by camera movement, there’s really not a lot you can do unless you’re prepared to do a lot of heavy duty reconstruction using the clone tool.

If it’s fringeing caused by chromatic abberation, you’ll find Photoshop actually has a dedicated tool for fixing this under "Filters>Distort>Lens Corection".
Chromatic abberation is identified by coloured fringes around items in the image, usually towards the edges and corners, and the tool corrects it by shunting and resizing the red, green and blue channels.

If you could post a link to the picture, we might be able to offer more comprehensive help.

"Sam" wrote in message

<SNIP>

If it’s fringeing caused by chromatic abberation, you’ll find Photoshop actually has a dedicated tool for fixing this under "Filters>Distort>Lens Corection".
Chromatic abberation is identified by coloured fringes around items in the image, usually towards the edges and corners, and the tool corrects it by shunting and resizing the red, green and blue channels.

Looks like a filter I could use, but it is not available on Photoshop v. 8 as far as I can see. Anyone know of a plugin for download? (Preferably free)
R.

"Sam" wrote:

"The Old Bloke" wrote in message

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

Regards
Doug

Depends what sort of blur you’re talking about, as there are several types.
If it’s lens blurring caused by a poorly focused camera, you can duplicate the layer in photoshop, run a high pass filter on it and set the resulting layer to "Overlay" blend mode.
This will detect and enhance all the edge contrasts in the image. It won’t increase the sharpness, but it will give the illusion that it has.
If it’s motion blur caused by camera movement, there’s really not a lot you can do unless you’re prepared to do a lot of heavy duty reconstruction using the clone tool.

If it’s fringeing caused by chromatic abberation, you’ll find Photoshop actually has a dedicated tool for fixing this under "Filters>Distort>Lens Corection".
Chromatic abberation is identified by coloured fringes around items in the image, usually towards the edges and corners, and the tool corrects it by shunting and resizing the red, green and blue channels.

If you could post a link to the picture, we might be able to offer more comprehensive help.

It seems like there are plug-ins that can make several combinations like

– Making a duped layer

– Moving the layers around to darken the edge

– Then blending/removing the blurry edge etc..

But to me if the photo needs heavy repair then it ain’t worth the trouble.

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:42:52 -0000, "Sam" wrote:

"The Old Bloke" wrote in message

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

Regards
Doug

Depends what sort of blur you’re talking about, as there are several types.
If it’s lens blurring caused by a poorly focused camera, you can duplicate the layer in photoshop, run a high pass filter on it and set the resulting layer to "Overlay" blend mode.
This will detect and enhance all the edge contrasts in the image. It won’t increase the sharpness, but it will give the illusion that it has.
If it’s motion blur caused by camera movement, there’s really not a lot you can do unless you’re prepared to do a lot of heavy duty reconstruction using the clone tool.

If it’s fringeing caused by chromatic abberation, you’ll find Photoshop actually has a dedicated tool for fixing this under "Filters>Distort>Lens Corection".
Chromatic abberation is identified by coloured fringes around items in the image, usually towards the edges and corners, and the tool corrects it by shunting and resizing the red, green and blue channels.

If you could post a link to the picture, we might be able to offer more comprehensive help.

The family is not comfortable with the image being widely available, however I will email to an address.

Regards
Doug

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:15:28 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

The Old Bloke wrote:

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

See: http://www.focusmagic.com/

(I haven’t tried it but someone I know recommends it).

I gave it a good try without a better image

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:42:52 -0000, "Sam" wrote:

"The Old Bloke" wrote in message

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

Regards
Doug

Depends what sort of blur you’re talking about, as there are several types.
If it’s lens blurring caused by a poorly focused camera, you can duplicate the layer in photoshop, run a high pass filter on it and set the resulting layer to "Overlay" blend mode.
This will detect and enhance all the edge contrasts in the image. It won’t increase the sharpness, but it will give the illusion that it has.
If it’s motion blur caused by camera movement, there’s really not a lot you can do unless you’re prepared to do a lot of heavy duty reconstruction using the clone tool.

If it’s fringeing caused by chromatic abberation, you’ll find Photoshop actually has a dedicated tool for fixing this under "Filters>Distort>Lens Corection".
Chromatic abberation is identified by coloured fringes around items in the image, usually towards the edges and corners, and the tool corrects it by shunting and resizing the red, green and blue channels.

If you could post a link to the picture, we might be able to offer more comprehensive help.

I am a mere beginner with images, bit it looks like camera movement as the image looks like a TV ghost, albeit all looks blurred.

Remove the "X" s to reply directly

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 04:55:02 GMT, The Old Bloke wrote:

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 03:12:19 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:39:26 GMT, The Old Bloke wrote:

Path: feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!news.link pendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!pit-transit.telstra.net!new s.telstra.net!news-server.bigpond.net.au!53ab2750!not-for-ma il
From: The Old Bloke
Newsgroups: alt.graphics.photoshop
Subject: Out of focus photo
Message-ID:
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 15
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:39:26 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 58.174.162.216
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 1259397566 58.174.162.216 (Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:39:26 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:39:26 EST
Organization: BigPond Internet Services
Xref: eternal-september.org alt.graphics.photoshop:1986

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

Regards
Doug

Hi Doug,

Unfortunately, no. I’d suggest making the image available and see what some of us can do with it. If privacy is an issue, which it may well be for a family image, perhaps you could email individual copies. Based on past experience, I think the image can be improved over what you have now, using curves, and un-sharp mask to make things somewhat better.
On a more experimental (aka probably not practical) note, it *might* be possible to improve your image using a process called de-convolution. Here’s a web page demonstrating some relatively recent work in this area. The basic process consists of taking measurements of the camera properties, then using a rather hefty algorithm to reconstruct a blurred image. The Home page includes a link to some free experimental software that was used. http://www.bialith.com/Research/BARclockblur.htm

Mike, I have emailed the photo to you.

I hope you can help.

Regards
Doug

Hi Doug,

I haven’t received the image. Try sending it as an attachment to groups AT curvemeister.com
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:55:20 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

Hi People,

Is there anyway to fix/enhance an out of focus photo? I think the answer is no, but this is a really special case.

A Mate of mine lives in a remote part of Australia. His son turned 18 recently and there was a rare family reunion to celebrate the day. The young lad is in a wheelchair, and maybe has another year to live.
The family photo was badly ourt of focus.

Does anyone have a magic technique?

Regards
Doug

Here’s an idea since you’re figuring on photo shopping the image anyway’s.. It just requires some advance preparation..

Sort of a green screen effect. You take the background, assuming it’s intact. Inform the rest of the family what you need.. Maybe get a separate shot of JUST the background from the Oz family. Then separate shots of all the family in OZ in separate shots.

placement.. stick an x on a green screen test image for where you want all the relatives in Oz to stand, get them to take more pictures, and send them to you. Then you take green screen photos of all the rest positioned on the remaining X spots. A color wheel in all the photos would go a long way to equalizing the differences in colors from all the pieces of the photos you need to cut & paste together.

Then a little cut & paste, and edge blur to remove sharp edges. And they’re all back together. Make as many copies as you want.

ie: you can visit Iraq during a fire fight, and in the middle of a IED with PS. Go to Italy, Climb Everest etc…

Much faster & accurate than attempting to guess what sort of blur you have, and trying to step back in time to before it was blurred.

If you doubt the reality of this, do a google for fake images. Most will appear on nude sites.. ie: The monkey Michelle Obama that google removed from their search engines just this week. It was a good fake, but it stood out as a fake because of the 2 separate images being combined.

green screen = any plain colored wall. Take the photos of everyone on a plain background.
I don’t know of any magic that green has, other than it’s not a color normally found in nature, and stands out like a sore thumb when looking for edges. Simpler to remove the green background.. vs trying to separate a white shirt from a white background etc..

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:51:54 -0500, wrote:

I don’t know of any magic that green has, other than it’s not a color normally found in nature, and stands out like a sore thumb when looking for edges.

Green and blue are the common colors for screening, and still have their uses in digital. Blue screen was historically the preferred color for creating film mattes because emulsions exist that are sensitive only to blue light, and blue wavelengths give the best detail in a photograph.

Green is advantageous for digital photography – it’s one of the normal channels of an RGB image, has fewer jaggies due to the Bayer pattern arrangement of color filters, and the green channel is almost always less noisy than the blue channel.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:55:20 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

I don’t know of any magic that green has, other than it’s not a color normally
found in nature

?????
Where do you live if you think green isn’t a colour normally found in nature?
Green is the colour of grass, foliage, algae, the sea, moss, many animals etc.
Green is one of the most abundantly found colours in nature.

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:18:33 -0000, Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:55:20 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

I don’t know of any magic that green has, other than it’s not a color normally
found in nature

?????
Where do you live if you think green isn’t a colour normally found in nature?
Green is the colour of grass, foliage, algae, the sea, moss, many animals etc.
Green is one of the most abundantly found colours in nature.

LOL – I think what he meant was that, being mammals, we tend not to be green. We’re also self-centered enough that plants are almost always part of the background.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:11:51 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:18:33 -0000, Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:55:20 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

I don’t know of any magic that green has, other than it’s not a color normally
found in nature

?????
Where do you live if you think green isn’t a colour normally found in nature?
Green is the colour of grass, foliage, algae, the sea, moss, many animals etc.
Green is one of the most abundantly found colours in nature.

LOL – I think what he meant was that, being mammals, we tend not to be green. We’re also self-centered enough that plants are almost always part of the background.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

I don’t know why I’d bother explaining what I said any deeper, since it’s obvious that everyone knows that fluorescent lime green is NOT a color found naturally in nature.
So it’s a perfect choice to stand out from anything other than lime green sherbet. But then sherbet doesn’t fluoresce.

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:11:51 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:18:33 -0000, Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:55:20 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

I don’t know of any magic that green has, other than it’s not a color normally
found in nature

?????
Where do you live if you think green isn’t a colour normally found in nature?
Green is the colour of grass, foliage, algae, the sea, moss, many animals etc.
Green is one of the most abundantly found colours in nature.

LOL – I think what he meant was that, being mammals, we tend not to be green. We’re also self-centered enough that plants are almost always part of the background.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

I don’t know why I’d bother explaining what I said any deeper, since it’s obvious that everyone knows that fluorescent lime green is NOT a color found
naturally in nature.

Well, now that you’ve edited your statement to include the word *flourescent*, it makes sense.

Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:11:51 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:18:33 -0000, Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:55:20 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

I don’t know of any magic that green has, other than it’s not a color normally
found in nature

?????
Where do you live if you think green isn’t a colour normally found in nature?
Green is the colour of grass, foliage, algae, the sea, moss, many animals etc.
Green is one of the most abundantly found colours in nature.

LOL – I think what he meant was that, being mammals, we tend not to be green. We’re also self-centered enough that plants are almost always part of the background.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

I don’t know why I’d bother explaining what I said any deeper, since it’s obvious that everyone knows that fluorescent lime green is NOT a color found
naturally in nature.

Well, now that you’ve edited your statement to include the word *flourescent*, it makes sense.

Bread smell? Is that what makes "scents"?

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:52:18 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:

Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:11:51 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:18:33 -0000, Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:55:20 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

I don’t know of any magic that green has, other than it’s not a color normally
found in nature

?????
Where do you live if you think green isn’t a colour normally found in nature?
Green is the colour of grass, foliage, algae, the sea, moss, many animals etc.
Green is one of the most abundantly found colours in nature.

LOL – I think what he meant was that, being mammals, we tend not to be green. We’re also self-centered enough that plants are almost always part of the background.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

I don’t know why I’d bother explaining what I said any deeper, since it’s obvious that everyone knows that fluorescent lime green is NOT a color found
naturally in nature.

Well, now that you’ve edited your statement to include the word *flourescent*, it makes sense.

Bread smell? Is that what makes "scents"?

Thanks for raisin that issue, Alan.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

"Alan Browne" wrote in message

Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:11:51 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:18:33 -0000, Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:55:20 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

I don’t know of any magic that green has, other than it’s not a color normally
found in nature

?????
Where do you live if you think green isn’t a colour normally found in nature?
Green is the colour of grass, foliage, algae, the sea, moss, many animals
etc.
Green is one of the most abundantly found colours in nature.

LOL – I think what he meant was that, being mammals, we tend not to be green. We’re also self-centered enough that plants are almost always part
of the background.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

I don’t know why I’d bother explaining what I said any deeper, since it’s
obvious that everyone knows that fluorescent lime green is NOT a color found
naturally in nature.

Well, now that you’ve edited your statement to include the word *flourescent*, it makes sense.

Bread smell? Is that what makes "scents"?

mmmMMMmmm…Freshly ground coffee…

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:09:45 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:52:18 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:

Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:11:51 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:18:33 -0000, Sam wrote:

wrote in message
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:55:20 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

I don’t know of any magic that green has, other than it’s not a color normally
found in nature

?????
Where do you live if you think green isn’t a colour normally found in nature?
Green is the colour of grass, foliage, algae, the sea, moss, many animals etc.
Green is one of the most abundantly found colours in nature.

LOL – I think what he meant was that, being mammals, we tend not to be green. We’re also self-centered enough that plants are almost always part of the background.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

I don’t know why I’d bother explaining what I said any deeper, since it’s obvious that everyone knows that fluorescent lime green is NOT a color found
naturally in nature.

Well, now that you’ve edited your statement to include the word *flourescent*, it makes sense.

Bread smell? Is that what makes "scents"?

Thanks for raisin that issue, Alan.

It’s not like you to make rye comments, Mike.

—
Tony Cooper – Orlando, Florida

david johnson was inspired to say

On a more experimental (aka probably not practical) note, it *might* be possible to improve your image using a process called de-convolution. Here’s a web page demonstrating some relatively recent work in this area. The basic process consists of taking measurements of the camera properties, then using a rather hefty algorithm to reconstruct a blurred image. The Home page includes a link to some free experimental software that was used. http://www.bialith.com/Research/BARclockblur.htm

as already mentioned its pretty hard to do

http://www.focusmagic.com/ this might help but don’t expect miracles.

I find Focusmagic pretty useful both with motion blur (including camera shake) and occasional oof shots.

It uses deconvolution formulae, and is different from ‘normal’ sharpening techniques which rely on micro contrast effects.

However, the correction can get fairly nasty when the blur is greater than 10pixels, and worse if the blur is not linear. eg when someone has swung the camera round in an arc.

I’m not clear from this thread if anyone has attempted to do this with the image in question. Is it just too blurred to get results?

Mike
—
Michael J Davis

<>{
Free advice is often worth
less than you paid for it.
<>{

On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 19:40:36 +0000, Michael J Davis wrote:

david johnson was inspired to say

On a more experimental (aka probably not practical) note, it *might* be possible to improve your image using a process called de-convolution. Here’s a web page demonstrating some relatively recent work in this area. The basic process consists of taking measurements of the camera properties, then using a rather hefty algorithm to reconstruct a blurred image. The Home page includes a link to some free experimental software that was used. http://www.bialith.com/Research/BARclockblur.htm

as already mentioned its pretty hard to do

http://www.focusmagic.com/ this might help but don’t expect miracles.

I find Focusmagic pretty useful both with motion blur (including camera shake) and occasional oof shots.

It uses deconvolution formulae, and is different from ‘normal’ sharpening techniques which rely on micro contrast effects.
However, the correction can get fairly nasty when the blur is greater than 10pixels, and worse if the blur is not linear. eg when someone has swung the camera round in an arc.

I’m not clear from this thread if anyone has attempted to do this with the image in question. Is it just too blurred to get results?
Mike

It’s motion blur, linear blur of about 20 pixels with the appearance of faintly doubling the image. I’ve been experimenting with various ways to deal with it.

Now that you mention it, I’ll see if FocusMagic has a demo version and give it a go.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

Mike Russell was inspired to say

On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 19:40:36 +0000, Michael J Davis wrote:

david johnson was inspired to say

On a more experimental (aka probably not practical) note, it *might* be possible to improve your image using a process called de-convolution. Here’s a web page demonstrating some relatively recent work in this area. The basic process consists of taking measurements of the camera properties, then using a rather hefty algorithm to reconstruct a blurred image. The Home page includes a link to some free experimental software that was used. http://www.bialith.com/Research/BARclockblur.htm

as already mentioned its pretty hard to do

http://www.focusmagic.com/ this might help but don’t expect miracles.

I find Focusmagic pretty useful both with motion blur (including camera shake) and occasional oof shots.

It uses deconvolution formulae, and is different from ‘normal’ sharpening techniques which rely on micro contrast effects.
However, the correction can get fairly nasty when the blur is greater than 10pixels, and worse if the blur is not linear. eg when someone has swung the camera round in an arc.

I’m not clear from this thread if anyone has attempted to do this with the image in question. Is it just too blurred to get results?
Mike

It’s motion blur, linear blur of about 20 pixels with the appearance of faintly doubling the image. I’ve been experimenting with various ways to deal with it.

Now that you mention it, I’ll see if FocusMagic has a demo version and give it a go.

Yes it does – 10 attempts.
It rescued a couple of problem photos of mine (1 camera shake, 1 subject movement) and I decided to buy it. v. useful.

However 20 pixels with ‘doubling effect’ will give some harsh effects in Focus magic. I suspect it would need some pretty sophisticated algorithms to resolve that.

Mike
—
Michael J Davis

www.flickr.com/photos/watchman

<><
Photography takes an instant out of time,
altering life by holding it still. – Dorothea Lange
<><

On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 12:29:05 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 19:40:36 +0000, Michael J Davis wrote:

david johnson was inspired to say

On a more experimental (aka probably not practical) note, it *might* be possible to improve your image using a process called de-convolution. Here’s a web page demonstrating some relatively recent work in this area. The basic process consists of taking measurements of the camera properties, then using a rather hefty algorithm to reconstruct a blurred image. The Home page includes a link to some free experimental software that was used. http://www.bialith.com/Research/BARclockblur.htm

as already mentioned its pretty hard to do

http://www.focusmagic.com/ this might help but don’t expect miracles.

I find Focusmagic pretty useful both with motion blur (including camera shake) and occasional oof shots.

It uses deconvolution formulae, and is different from ‘normal’ sharpening techniques which rely on micro contrast effects.
However, the correction can get fairly nasty when the blur is greater than 10pixels, and worse if the blur is not linear. eg when someone has swung the camera round in an arc.

I’m not clear from this thread if anyone has attempted to do this with the image in question. Is it just too blurred to get results?
Mike

It’s motion blur, linear blur of about 20 pixels with the appearance of faintly doubling the image. I’ve been experimenting with various ways to deal with it.

Now that you mention it, I’ll see if FocusMagic has a demo version and give it a go.

Hi Mike,

I calculated the blur at 16 pixels. I tried with focusmagic without success. I was able to "recombine" the image, but at the expense of introducing major artefacts.

Regards
Doug

On Thu, 03 Dec 2009 07:08:22 GMT, The Old Bloke wrote:

On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 12:29:05 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 19:40:36 +0000, Michael J Davis wrote:

david johnson was inspired to say

On a more experimental (aka probably not practical) note, it *might* be possible to improve your image using a process called de-convolution. Here’s a web page demonstrating some relatively recent work in this area. The basic process consists of taking measurements of the camera properties, then using a rather hefty algorithm to reconstruct a blurred image. The Home page includes a link to some free experimental software that was used. http://www.bialith.com/Research/BARclockblur.htm

as already mentioned its pretty hard to do

http://www.focusmagic.com/ this might help but don’t expect miracles.

I find Focusmagic pretty useful both with motion blur (including camera shake) and occasional oof shots.

It uses deconvolution formulae, and is different from ‘normal’ sharpening techniques which rely on micro contrast effects.
However, the correction can get fairly nasty when the blur is greater than 10pixels, and worse if the blur is not linear. eg when someone has swung the camera round in an arc.

I’m not clear from this thread if anyone has attempted to do this with the image in question. Is it just too blurred to get results?
Mike

It’s motion blur, linear blur of about 20 pixels with the appearance of faintly doubling the image. I’ve been experimenting with various ways to deal with it.

Now that you mention it, I’ll see if FocusMagic has a demo version and give it a go.

Hi Mike,

I calculated the blur at 16 pixels. I tried with focusmagic without success. I was able to "recombine" the image, but at the expense of introducing major artefacts.

I had a similar experience. I’m in the midst of experimenting with offsetting the image and subtracting it from itself – this also seems not to be working all that well. I do have a version that looks somewhat better, using that good old standby, unsharp mask, but it does so at the expense of some of the fine detail that the image has.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

The Old Bloke was inspired to say

On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 12:29:05 -0800, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 19:40:36 +0000, Michael J Davis wrote:

I find Focusmagic pretty useful both with motion blur (including camera shake) and occasional oof shots.

It uses deconvolution formulae, and is different from ‘normal’ sharpening techniques which rely on micro contrast effects.
However, the correction can get fairly nasty when the blur is greater than 10pixels, and worse if the blur is not linear. eg when someone has swung the camera round in an arc.

I’m not clear from this thread if anyone has attempted to do this with the image in question. Is it just too blurred to get results?

It’s motion blur, linear blur of about 20 pixels with the appearance of faintly doubling the image. I’ve been experimenting with various ways to deal with it.

Now that you mention it, I’ll see if FocusMagic has a demo version and give it a go.

I calculated the blur at 16 pixels. I tried with focusmagic without success. I was able to "recombine" the image, but at the expense of introducing major artefacts.

Yes, from the way you were describing it, I suspected that would be the problem.

Mike
—
Michael J Davis

<Photographing the public for fifty years>

The Old Bloke wrote:

If you could post a link to the picture, we might be able to offer more comprehensive help.

The family is not comfortable with the image being widely available, however I will email to an address.

And the non-family member may be very comfortable making your uncomfortable being widely available.