Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
Thread started 11 Oct 2011 (Tuesday) 17:54
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Guess I have to stop deleting my blurry keepers...

 
MNUplander
Goldmember
2,534 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 134
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
     
Oct 12, 2011 12:18 |  #31

huntersdad wrote in post #13239564 (external link)
I think Shane's remark kind ties to yowzer. Salvaging the occassional shot is one thing, using it to fix bad shots is another. It will become a replacement for good technique by some.

Whatever, if you practice bad techinique but rely on photoshop to cover your ass, you might get more comments on flicker but youre never going to produce any masterpieces or likely even sell a print any larger than 8x12. These guys should not even be a blip on your radar because your work will crush theirs in the long run.

If you're a real photographer, your competition is not the schmuck who cant operate a camera properly only to use PS as a crutch. If they are your competition, you're doing it wrong.

Your competition should be those photographers that do great work in camera and improve it even more in post. If you choose to use purist techniques, just know that you'll be working that much harder just to keep up with your peers, because they will no doubt use any tool in their arsenal to beat their competition.

th0rr wrote in post #13240432 (external link)
Seems like every time something new comes along some folks believe it signals the death of something. Meh. I just see it as another tool in the arsenal for me to use as I see fit. Personally I can't wait to check it out. Especially as I get older and shakier :)

From my understanding it won't fix out of focus shots but merely correct motion blur.

I agree.


Lake Superior and North Shore Landscape Photography (external link)
Buy & Sell Feedback
R6, EF16-35 f4 IS, EF 50 1.2, EF 100 2.8 IS Macro, 150-600C

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bosscat
Goldmember
1,892 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Ontario Canada
     
Oct 12, 2011 12:23 |  #32

cdifoto wrote in post #13240510 (external link)
You guys seem to fail to grasp the notion that the real creativity is knowing where to place the camera in relation to the subject. No machine can decide that for you or let you skip it altogether.

Didn't some guy by the name of Adams say something along those same lines?

But people want technology do it all for them....notice how few people can do simple math in their heads, because they have become used to using a calculator to do the math for them.

How do you tell a person with a GPS to get lost?

In the old days if they couldn't read a map and have a sense of direction they were in big troubles.


Your camera is alot smarter than the "M" Zealots would have you believe

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cdifoto
Don't get pissy with me
Avatar
34,090 posts
Likes: 44
Joined Dec 2005
     
Oct 12, 2011 12:59 |  #33

Bosscat wrote in post #13240545 (external link)
Didn't some guy by the name of Adams say something along those same lines?

Yeah I think it was something overly simplified like "the difference between a great photo and a bad one is knowing where to stand" or some such. I don't know it exactly or who said it, so I didn't use it.

As far as the rest, I use and rely on technology to make my life easier but I also try to make sure I know what to do if it fails. People that don't know what they're doing aren't my competition so they're free to do, rely on, and be screwed by whatever they want. It's no concern of mine.


Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here (external link). Cursing at your worse-than-a-map reflector? Check out this vid! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
harcosparky
Goldmember
2,431 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 61
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Harford County - ( Bel Air ) Maryland
     
Oct 12, 2011 13:18 |  #34

SimplyShane wrote in post #13238494 (external link)
To be honest, I'm very sad at hearing this news as well.

I know it seems quite stupid to say that taking the challenge out of photography will destroy the art, but that's how I feel.

The challenge of photography has noting to do with focus or blurriness.

The challenge is in creating an image that tells a story, an image that draws the viewer into it.

An apple on a plate, in focus or blurry pretty much has the same artistic value.

Now place that apple somewhere else, and it's a whole new ball game.

A room is just a room, the difference between two shots of the same room is the location of the camera.


But there will always be people who use software in post processing as a crutch to create images.

The real challenge in photography is creating an image with the camera that does not need post processing to make it worth looking at.

At the end of the day there will be Great Photographers and Great Photoshop Users who know how to use a camera.

.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigDogDaddyBill
Hatchling
9 posts
Joined Aug 2011
     
Oct 12, 2011 13:21 as a reply to  @ cdifoto's post |  #35

In general a captured image contains the information of a focused shot which is then blurred from motion etc.. The software will simply look for like pixel vectors and calculate mass densities to determine a probable reverse vectors to apply and basically shift the image back to the beginning of the image. As someone else said basically it will attempt to clean up motion blur through math. Kind of like after the fact IS. I have over simplified this but thats the gist.

In the end ART is art and creative people will use infinite tools to try and deliver their vision. I look at many many photos from people like these on the forum and can clearly see thoughtful composition, planning and effort that no software will recreate in my lifetime (I Hope!)

Bill




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bosscat
Goldmember
1,892 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Ontario Canada
     
Oct 12, 2011 13:27 as a reply to  @ cdifoto's post |  #36

Just ask the Crackberry users right about now, who have come to rely on their little device and now that it isn't working for like the 3rd day in a row, how thats working out.....LOL!


Your camera is alot smarter than the "M" Zealots would have you believe

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dave ­ kadolph
"Fix the cigarette lighter"
Avatar
6,138 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Mar 2007
Location: West Michigan--166.33 miles to the Cook County courthouse
     
Oct 12, 2011 17:01 as a reply to  @ Bosscat's post |  #37

Just a step closer to making the mid level pro obsolete--no need for fast primes or proper technique.

Find a pose you like on Flickr to knock off--a quick run through to fix blur and focus--shoot it over to a program like Portrait Professional to smooth and reshape--and pick up you prints @ Costco for next to nothing.

The "digital darkroom" takes very little skill or effort compared to when the process was done under an enlarger with a negative--and it will only get easier and more automated.


Middle age is when you can finally afford the things that a young man could truly enjoy.
Tools of the trade

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SimplyShane
Senior Member
Avatar
684 posts
Joined Oct 2010
     
Oct 12, 2011 22:14 |  #38
bannedPermanent ban

harcosparky wrote in post #13240817 (external link)
The challenge of photography has noting to do with focus or blurriness.

The challenge is in creating an image that tells a story, an image that draws the viewer into it.

An apple on a plate, in focus or blurry pretty much has the same artistic value.

Now place that apple somewhere else, and it's a whole new ball game.

A room is just a room, the difference between two shots of the same room is the location of the camera.


But there will always be people who use software in post processing as a crutch to create images.

The real challenge in photography is creating an image with the camera that does not need post processing to make it worth looking at.

At the end of the day there will be Great Photographers and Great Photoshop Users who know how to use a camera.

.

The challenge of making a photograph without post processing means nothing to those looking only at the end result. (Unfortunately.)


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/bengford (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SimplyShane
Senior Member
Avatar
684 posts
Joined Oct 2010
     
Oct 12, 2011 22:22 |  #39
bannedPermanent ban

cdifoto wrote in post #13240721 (external link)
Yeah I think it was something overly simplified like "the difference between a great photo and a bad one is knowing where to stand" or some such. I don't know it exactly or who said it, so I didn't use it.

As far as the rest, I use and rely on technology to make my life easier but I also try to make sure I know what to do if it fails. People that don't know what they're doing aren't my competition so they're free to do, rely on, and be screwed by whatever they want. It's no concern of mine.

That's just it though: How is the amature hack geting "screwed" IF this function of Photoshop allows for sharp images without penalty?


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/bengford (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SimplyShane
Senior Member
Avatar
684 posts
Joined Oct 2010
     
Oct 12, 2011 22:27 |  #40
bannedPermanent ban

Raylon wrote in post #13240469 (external link)
Yes it gets sharper but how true is it to the original photo had it been taken correctly? Also who knows if the program actually did anything or if the program he was using simply switched to a non blurry image when he pressed a button.

I doubt he would lie.
However, your first point is a good one: How DOES it compare to an original with perfect focus? That's a big, big question.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/bengford (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Citizen_Insane
Senior Member
Avatar
453 posts
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Ames, IA
     
Oct 12, 2011 22:40 |  #41

I don't get it. You'll all complaining about this, why aren't you out there shooting film and developing it yourselves? If the process matters that much to you why would you want to shoot digital? Can you not get the shots you want on film?

Everyone constantly complains that technology is taking something away from how things are supposed to be done without realizing that technology is really going to open new doors for creativity.


Gear
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Edwin ­ Herdman
Senior Member
747 posts
Joined Aug 2011
     
Oct 12, 2011 22:54 |  #42

dave kadolph wrote in post #13241858 (external link)
Just a step closer to making the mid level pro obsolete--no need for fast primes or proper technique.

By itself, this won't do depth of field - although there's work being done in that area too...soon you'll be able to add "no need for tilt-shift lenses or view camera movements" to the list of hardware supposedly obsoleted by software. You'll still get better results, and quicker, from using the real thing, although I'm sure PS will let you get some types of results better.

If your thing is rendering artistic scenes, well, there's 3D modeling packages and all sorts of rendering tools that can let you make whatever you wish, arbitrarily. You hear people in big film effects houses grouse now and then about too much digital work and not enough "old-fashioned craft" but the new stuff isn't a replacement for traditional work so much as a route to other avenues. There's some value in these new tools, from any perspective. You can make things adhere to some idea rather than to reality. This is more of the same.

Photographs never lie, now do they? :cool: I've become an anti-Photoshop purist (in my own workflow) in spite of myself, but despite how much they add to it, popping things into PS isn't faster than just converting the RAW in DPP, so I avoid it when possible. If that means another few seconds setting up a shot, no problem. However, some people will need this for various reasons. If it saves a news photograph that ends up winning the Pulitzer prize, I'm sure people won't be so dismissive.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SimplyShane
Senior Member
Avatar
684 posts
Joined Oct 2010
     
Oct 12, 2011 23:46 as a reply to  @ Edwin Herdman's post |  #43
bannedPermanent ban

I just got done reading about Lytro and its Light Field Technology. (Which is FAR more durastic than Adobe's effort.)

And all I can manage to say is one thing: Good-Bye Professionals.

(That's assuming there are no flaws with this approach, which has yet to be seen. All I know for certain is that times are changing and the future of photography remains VERY unclear.)


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/bengford (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Edwin ­ Herdman
Senior Member
747 posts
Joined Aug 2011
     
Oct 13, 2011 00:08 as a reply to  @ SimplyShane's post |  #44

Lytro is too little, too early (or too late, depending on your perspective; it's not fundamentally a new process). Maybe in the future it will allow something, but I have to assume that even in the future people will like taking pictures more quickly and with more detail - the Lytro, which is a light field photograph, currently takes up so much resolution and so much processing power that you only get web-resolution thumbnails and they must be processed on powerful hardware for a VERY long duration.

Lytro or any other process will be useful in some situations, but all the technology it will take will simply allow "real" photographers to travel lighter and shoot even quicker than before. What's the use of being able to fiddle with sharpness front-to-back when your camera is shooting huge images of hundreds of megapixels at dozens of frames per second? You can just focus bracket in that case! (Lytro doesn't even really help speed-essential photography; it requires longer exposures since the system captures less light than your lens takes in - as Joseph S. Wisniewski points out on DP Review, the microlenses aren't round, so there's an extra stop lost right away. Assuming you have lens speed to spare, though, it might just help you get the focus right if you snap the shutter at the right time - and if you can afford to toss away 95% of the information, which is what the Lytro prototype does.)

Don't hold your breath on that one.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tipidsale
Senior Member
331 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Sep 2011
     
Oct 13, 2011 00:22 |  #45

my question is ,,,, Is this Deblurring software already available in the market? How much?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

9,602 views & 0 likes for this thread, 36 members have posted to it.
Guess I have to stop deleting my blurry keepers...
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.55forum software
version 2.55 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is marsmith64
785 guests, 190 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.