Printable View
I was on vactation and my friedn was taking some pictures, but when he took some, the pibtures cam out blury, he had a little bit of a shaky hand. It looks like i added a blur of 18 degree to it.
Is there a way to kind og unblur a picture, or only to a curtion extence. if u want to look at he picture, i will send a link so u know how bad it is
To unblur a really bad picture, to make it worth to do, it has to very special or at least have some interesting parts or the work is too much to endure because you will not get ever back to what it would have been if he hadn't have shaken the camera.
If it is primarily faces that you must restore, if you have on hand other pictures of the people in unblurred shots, similar expression and pose, you can collage the photos together and get a respectable result.
Badly blurred photos aren't improved very much with the unsharp mask.
Sally, What where you on when you typed this sentence. (LOL) http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gifQuote:
To unblur a really bad picture, to make it worth to do, it has to very special or at least have some interesting parts or the work is too much to endure because you will not get ever back to what it would have been if he hadn't have shaken the camera.
Sark
Hey, I just type what comes in my head.
What's wrong, can't a creative person have creative sentence structure?
U hv gt to be kidding me!
I should have turned on the anti-aliasing, right?
http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
No offense, Sally, but it also sounded funny to me,too. http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif Specially the part about "the work is too much to endure..." http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif. Yup, that'll make him think twice for sure. Good advice, too.
I have fixed some of the worst pictures imaginable, and it is anything but a labor of love.
The inspiration comes in finding what tools and which methods will yield the best results. The rest is sheer labor.
Acutally, for really bad photos, I use PhotoImpact more than Photoshop, because some of the tools can have all sorts of textures applied and Photoshop just isn't set up to do that. Try fixing wallpaper in Photoshop. No thankyou. PI is a better choice for that.
And no one program will do the whole job, then you go on the web and look for people with similar body parts, and then color them for the correct skin tone. You find shoes for people whose feet are the Nightmare Before Christmas.
(Actually, the succint version above is better than this grammatical and well-spelled rant, isn't it,and a whole lot more funny!)
Reconstruction is not fun, it is WORK!
And I became an artist because I hate WORK!, there I said it, so if there isn't something really redeeming about the whole project, go out and take the picture again, because the one square inch left of the original photo is just not worth the effort. The viewer will stand there after your effort and declare, they could have done better.
Yeah, right!
Hi Sally.
I'm not really one to speak. My grammar is generally terrible. If I have more than a few lines to post, I cheat by composing in Word and then pasting into the forums reply box.
I never used written communication much until I discovered the web. I still have to edit myself heavily when posting on the various forums. Like you, I tend to type what comes into my head, but it rarely types as well is it would sound verbally spoken.
I'm also aware of the language differences, even between English speaking nationals (USA, UK etc). That is why that sentence amused me. You generally write very cohesively which is why it stood out so much. Kind of, "English as a foreign language". Sorry http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/smile.gif http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/smile.gif http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/smile.gif
As for the gist of your reply, and your comments on the original post, I entirely agree. Sometimes it's better just to start again, or accept what you've got.
I remember a poster on another forum wanting help with an old grainy B&W photo of their mother. She was wearing a long white dress, which was very burnt out. She had a far from small child on her shoulders, his legs covering much of her upper body. The poster wanted advice on removing the child from the photo. Although possible, it would have left little more than her face and a mass of white from her dress. Those parts of her arms that were not hidden behind the child's legs would have looked almost deformed without the child in the image.
Of course, you can always extract a face and dump it onto an entirely different image, but why would anyone want to do that. That particular photo showed the mother with far more personality for having the child on her shoulders, than a falsely constructed image of her with her face on someone else's body. I guess the poster had their own legitimate reasons, but even Photoshop has its limitations.
As for sharpening, it's important to understand that all you are really doing is adjusting contrast. Sharpening filters just target pixels more intelligently when applying that contrast, this gives the illusion of increased sharpness. Ultimately, a bad image is a bad image, and even Photoshop is rarely able to change that fact.
There you go, 400+ words straight off my head, not a word processor in sight…..Honest http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
Sark
Thanks, Sark
I tell you occasionally even I, a natural blonde, have a "blonde" moment... though I hate that phrase. Einstein's hair was white, well it was eventually... hair color does not determine how intelligent you really are.
I get a lot of impossible problems similar to this "blurred photograph fix request" at work which I cannot turn down, I am paid to do them. Especially we get funeral folders, like church bulletins published by the mortary for the service for the bereaved family. They usually have a picture of the deceased on the front, or want a collage of pictures of their life. And the pictures I get to put on the front cover are often beyond terrible. I have been tempted to go over if they are available for viewing after embombing and taking a better picture. JUST KIDDING, death creeps me out. Both of my parents and my older brother have died and especially my parents, it was more than hard to deal with. I suppose that the bereaved family can't hardly get find the pictures they really need, which explains the horrendous pictures I have to work with or someone else who doesn't have the good pictures must handle this because the grief is so terrible.
Genrally I do make the pictures look presentable. The worst for me was a premature baby which died, even trying to make the picture look like a "baby" was nearly impossible. And being a mom, it got to me, I had to concentrate on the technical problems at hand in order to work it out and meet the deadline (no pun intended).
So even my %$^&*#()@?!?!? frustrations are bettered spelled and grammaticall correct???? Whew, I have to much to live up to too much, just who is this "sallybode" anyway.... I don't think I like her.
The steps in fixing a rotten picture begins by deciding what to preserve: the features such as the eyes, nose and mouth and ears, and the hair, but to blur the grainyness out of the face. I always create a duplicate layer of the original just in case I screw up the face like I screwed up my words, Sark. And make a second duplicate that I blur. I select what I want to preserve and then making a layer mask, I paint out the eyes on the layer which is blurred and the nose and other details. Of course, you don't have to start with a selection, but you have less to paint out if you do. You can do this with the eraser tool, but I prefer non-destructive tools so I can revert in case I need to. That mole or wart I remove may turn out to be a cherished beauty mark. You can't ever tell with folks, sometimes.
Then when I am done taking out what is undesireable with a truly rotten picture, I look for things I can put back in to fool the eye.
Before I forget (my favorite pasttime of late...) I had one picture to restore for a young Marine who had died, and the picture which was forwarded to us from the newspaper was very small and only 150 dpi. Plus it was printed previous in a newspaper previously, so it had a moire pattern, even though it was received as a .jpg by email. Before I started the basic step above, I had to descreen the picture. Photoshop does not have a decent "remove moire" filter, and the despecke and remove noise and remove dust and scratches does not satisfactorially get rid of the fine dot pattern. Since my object is always commercial printing, I will get a terrible moire pattern if I don't descreen when it goes to press. Corel's PhotoPaint does a great job of descreening a moire pattern. I usually apply it several times. And I like it because you can controls that can specify the dpi and how much descreeing you want. PP does sense your dpi, but sometimes, though I haven't ever tried this, this could be changed. Any way, Ulead PhotoImpact also has a "remove moire" filter and it does also work quite well. Save as a .psd, bring it back into Phtoshop.
On this picture, he was in the standard pose you see of Marines who have just graduated Boot Camp. He was in that colorful uniform, his white hat with black shiny leather bill, and all the brass buttons. All of this would be impossible to restore because it was already bad and faded and now more blurred from the remove moire filter. The picture was only 1" by 1.5" and was to be printed about 3" by 4.5". My middle son's best friend is also a Marines and I had his boot camp snapshot which is only wallet-sized. So I also scanned that in. The navy blue of the coat picked up a lot of dust even though I clean the print before I scan and the glass, but I was able to enlarge that wallet-sized one by scanning twice the dpi we print at, I scanned it at 600 dpi. Then the enlargement isn't so bad, to bring it back to 300 dpi the size I needed. I went on the web and found a site where you can buy all the medals, pins, ribbons, buttons and emblems that Marines wear and was able to find some large detail pictures of those things which I copied and pasted in Photoshop. Even though the wallet-size was a good idea to use, it didn't solve all the troubles, it helped with the body (both men in the same pose and same clothing), the emblems that really make the uniform look sharp, must be in focus. No one can tell you put a blur on the coat to remove the dust, but you have to have in focus emblems and buttons, and blowing up a picture does not keep buttons in perfect focus. I drew a line with my vector tools and stroked it for the red piping that is around the coat edge and neck edge and embossed these to give them dimension. Also did the same thing with the eppelets. Then I reassembled the picture I was "creating": the face I needed with the other items which now I had. Fortunately, Marines out of Boot Camp don't have hair issues--all are equally clean shaven. Because I can draw and know who eyes should look, I used my vector tools to create the iris and pupil of the eye. For the iris, I flood filled with the angle gradient pulled from the center, zoom and radial blurred it and added gausian noise and zoom blurred it. I made the white of the eye and shaded it. Plut a gleem in the eye, merged and put behind the Marine's original eyes, on the layer below, then erased his eyes and let the newly constructed eyes show through. Noses, you can define the edges and shadows which give it the shape and the same for lips, and since he wasn't smiling, I didn't have to worry about his teeth. I did borrow ears from the son's friend which were fortunately quite similar looking. And then lightened them as the man who had died was Caucasian and my "other son" is of Philippine decent and is darker complected.
Gee, since we have a new forum, how do you post a picture?!?!?
Oh, well, I made an eye, I did a lot more than described above, but it is about what I had to do to restore the eyes of the Marine. the end result that is. If my upload doesn't work: here is the link:
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7ell8/i...eye-detail.jpg
It took more time than I really have to spend doing this, however, because we feel for service men who are losing their lives, we felt it was worth the effort. Everyone was very well pleased with the results.
It is a matter of heart, in this case, the motivation to fix the picture: I have two sons on an aircraft carrier who are part of a team giving air cover to the Marines and Army on the ground in Iraq. My son's best friend who is like a son to me, is going to Iraq and I am scared for him.
You can't do for all but sometimes in some small way we can do an act of kindness for those who grieve.
It was only later that I found out the man whose picture I restore was not killed in Iraq. His family had chosen to give the newspaper and then us an old photo of him, (since the Marines' uniforms have not changed for years... who would know). The man who died was actually 56, killed in a car accident and was now a captain, or something like that-- I don't remember entirely, it's been several months.
To do extensive photo retouch, you have to have a good understanding of anatomy, know how good photography should look, and know how to get the best use of the tools Photoshop has to offer. It is not enough to draw on the computer, modeling in clay and knowing how deep eyes are set into their lids, for example and how to recreate that depth then with a real pencil, or real paint or with a real airbrush, helps immensely. You also should know how much constrast to use if you are working with black and white so that the photo does not look harsh. You don't always want to use the full-spectrum of dynamic range in Photoshop, the press will plug the darks, so holding some back is better. Also on for the press, you have to watch out for white highlights, since the more detailed press is devoted to color and these folders I make up are run on the smaller press, the whites must all have some dot pattern in them, you can't go under 8% or the dot pattern will leave an uneven white whole whereas some dot pattern present in the whites actually looks better. That is until you apply a vignette faded to white, in which case the above reasoning does not hold, you want no dot pattern when the vignette fades out.
How do you condense all that experience into a five minute tutorial?
There are no easy solutions sometimes.
But having skill and expertise.... is not something you can completely train either. You have to have intuition and be innovative.
Example: the eyelashes in the above sketch of the eye are the Photoshop grass brush.
:D
Sally is right. Although the original post was just a question for a simple method of unblurring, (or for something like motion UNblurring, if I picture the description right), the process of photo enhancement could be anything from applying a simple filter to practically redrawing the entire pic. Sally also gave some very good methods for tackling problems that might arise when doing "photos from hell"... salvaging hopeless pics. Hope Kahn would take the time to read through the topic. Lots of good ideas here. But I'll keep a lookout for plugins and filters that might be useful, in the meanwhile. No promises, though... :p
Hi Sally.
Your eye image clearly shows you are a very talented artist. I'm genuinely in awe of anyone who can create such work. What a lot of newbies that post on some of the graphics forums fail to understand is that Photoshop and Paint etc, are just tools. Whilst they can sometimes work minor miracles by just knowing which buttons to press, often the images they see posted on the web and wish to emulate, are the result of artistic ability that goes beyond simply applying the right combination of filters etc. Like you, most digital artists of any merit could produce similarly impressive work using traditional media. Digital technology alone is no substitute for talent, or hard work.
As to some of the images you have had to rescue, my own interest is geared more towards photography and I'm very grateful I do not have to apply commercial considerations to the time spent at my PC. I have done a few rebuilds on family photos that have suffered from being exposed to direct sunlight, but these were mainly just re-colouring/tinting and a few adjustments. Those I've been asked to repair for friends/neighbours are usually older B&W prints that are scratched, torn etc. Quite straightforward really. They rarely assume that really bad images can be saved.
As to the original poster's problem image, it seems to have been blurred from being shot out of focus, or by movement during exposure. Just as a cheap lens produces poor resolution/detail, a poorly focused image will suffer from an even greater drop in image detail. Even Photoshop cannot enhance detail that isn't there. Having said that, it would still have been interesting to see the image, just to see exactly how bad it was and if it could have been improved without a complete work over.
Finally, a question. I'm guessing you use a tablet? I purchased a cheap 12" X 8" pad, but it was not quite as sensitive as I would have liked. It was also too large. I only used an active area that was about 6" X 4". I quickly sold it and purchased a Graphire 3 (5" X 4"). I really haven't got on with this. Whilst it's sensitivity is better it's much too small. It is not so much the active area, but the physical size that is too small. The plastic clip on cover is also horrible, I preferred the acetate sheet method of the cheaper unit. Just wondering what you use and might recommend. I mainly work with Draw and PS. I'll probably only use it for selections and path work.
Thanks
Sark
Thanks, Sark.
I do have a tablet, a Wacom, but it is older by today's standard and the active area is only 3" x 4". At work I do not have a tablet.
Size isn't that important when working on a computer and using a drawing tablet unless you had a huge monitor. Repositioning the pointer has been working for me all this time and my work is satisfactory. Although it is on my list of fun things to buy if I have the money of course. In which case I will change my tune I suppose.
To me, it is more about knowing an efficient way of working and which way works best. In Photoshop, I use the vector tools when I want to simulate a long stroke anyway, because it saves time. I can get the stroke I want almost every time right away, and since Photoshop can stroke a path with simulated brush pressure effects better than if you did it by hand, why bother getting a bigger tablet.
Sure, if I got a bigger tablet, I'd take my smaller one to work and use the new one for my experiments at home. After all, it is a cool toy.
Most of my work is done either in DRAW, PhotoPaint, Illustrator (I like the brush strokes which are available) and of course Photoshop. At home I paint about as much in PaintShopPro as in Painter because of the mixing palette gives great effects.
Yes, I draw and paint well by hand. And sculpt. Sculpting aids drawing in being able to feel the three dimensions that you are simulating with pencil and paint. It was required study for learing anatomy along with life drawing. Today, I don't know if people see the relevance. And when I am not sure of where to begin, I sketch by hand first, somtimes even scanning in my drawing as a basis of a new design.
A person with an artistic eye is more observant visually. You can't draw what you can't see. And if it is in your head what you are drawing, you are still seeing the final result in your brain.
If I do web graphics, I do like to use Xara a bit more.
Heck, I like to use them all. I find a lot of use for PhotoImpact, it has great textures.
Nothing does everything, you just use each program as a tool, choosing the one for the best effect, the best way from point A to B.
And when I am not doing artwork, I design knitting and crocheting. And compose music, write poetry.
I had a teacher tell me that you work on the whole design and don't concentrate on the details of one area, but leave the details till last (except f you want to render one area completely in developing a style for the whole peice--othewise you can have drawings which are out of perspective--a real waste of time). Most of my drawings are executed fairly quickly, but to give it the last bit of polish, takes more time than building up the components.
Outside of being female, I think I would have fit in well in the Renaissance. I am interested in just about everything.
Your tenacity to figure things out, qualifies you in the same light.
Hi again Sally.
I'm really surprised a tablet is not a crucial tool for you. I had expected you to be using an Intuos, or a larger Graphire at least. I guess it just confirms how talent is the primary tool in creating good artwork.
Your comments about design reminded me of a quote I read over twenty years ago in a book by the photographer Snowdon. "Decorate design, don't design decoration. I guess it just clarifies what you are saying. Of course with art, rules are there to be broken sometimes, but I think this is still a very valid universal statement for most art forms.
Whilst I would be kidding myself to think I could be a Renaissance man, I do have a broad interest in all things creative. Whilst I sometimes regret not following an artistic career path, I've always been aware that the commercial aspects can be restrictive sometimes. Those that can do exactly as they please and make a good living are a very rare breed, "Artists" in the fullest sense of the word I guess.
For now I'm happy playing with Draw and Photoshop and saving for my first Digital SLR. Who knows, maybe next year, if Corel get Draw 13 right, I'll have nothing to complain about and have time to have ago at creating my first web site. :) :) :)
Sark
To Sark,
To me, the Renaissance individual has a zest for life just for its own sake, I happen to be forutnate to be working in a field which suits me. I have often not been able to do that. I find myself far less tired in the evening because I am not hating my work. Hate is too strong a word, I was finding other work boring. And I hate being bored. To me, I have so much more to offer if left to my own devices, not meaning to sound conceited here, but obviously that is how some will take it.
To explore and to learn in whatever capacity a human being is able, makes them what a human being was designed to be. We are more than spectators, shapers of destiny. Not because of anything else but the joy of doing it.
To see if far more than just optical, the vision inside the head is always more than could be accomplished with the hands. Even before I am done with one project I am thinking about what to do on others. So I am sometimes terrible about finishing things as I want to jot those ideas down before I lose them permanently.
I don't get a lot of sleep.
Sometimes that lack of sleep spills over into my writing as it did that one day.
I take vitamins. I don't drink, used to. Stopped that long time now. My husband is an avid snorer. So I get help with my insomnia.
Got to go,
Sally