Can I correct the focus

For some reason I love the snapshot below. However, you can clearly see that the focus is off (way too close). I am wondering if there is any good combination of tricks (applicable by a newbie and fotoshop elements) to get the woman in focus? I have the raw file...

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

No.

You could blur the in focus bit and sharpen the heck out of the woman, but it still wouldn't be good IMO.

Out of focus is out of focus. I wouldn't even try to sharpen her per se, because you're going get visible artifacts, but make a layer mask and paint on some contrast to give the illusion of sharpness.


Edit: Just realized you didn't have Image Editing OK enabled... sorry.

You can do a couple of things - sharpen the image and then paint in that sharpening to define the woman more clearly. Also, burn in the image and then dodge the area around and including the woman, again to draw attention and focus to her.

I played around with you JPEG - If you want to see what I did, I'd be happy to work on the RAW file and post the result. What software do you use, so I don't use a process to which you may not have access?

If you don;t want to post a link to the RAW file here, I'll PM you my email.

Kirk

You could try this http://graphicreporter​.com …photoshop_outof​focus.html

If you miss the focus on a picture, there really isn't much you can do. There are just details you can't get back.

LiberationFrequency wrote in post #10904482
If you miss the focus on a picture, there really isn't much you can do. There are just details you can't get back.

Not strictly true. The details are there, just blurred - i.e. spread out over too many pixels. Deconvolution sharpening can calculate and subtract the blur, just like "Enhance that," on CSI.

Focus Magic
http://www.focusmagic.​com/

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

I mean yeah, I can do a masked, multi-layer sharpening process in my best attempt to get the girl into focus and yes, you can get it back somewhat... I was just saying that it will never truly represent what a picture could be if you actually nailed the focus. Im all for going into photoshop and getting back what you can, I just know that after 6 years of photoshop... there's stuff you can't really do as well as others.

I like that program you linked - Do they have one that handles raw files? Im sure you could recover a lot more if it could handle raw...

This was what I did earlier, but you didn't have Image Editing OK enabled... I didn't sharpen per se, but stepped up the contrast . What is sharpening anyway, except increasing the contrast between lighter and darker adjacent edges.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

tzalman wrote in post #10905243
Deconvolution sharpening can calculate and subtract the blur, just like "Enhance that," on CSI.

Isn't it amazing what they can get out of their enhancement tool on that show?!

Blur the whole thing and grayscale it. Or maybe sepia. You know, artsy it up. Lol.

ChasP505 wrote in post #10907426
This was what I did earlier, but you didn't have Image Editing OK enabled... I didn't sharpen per se, but stepped up the contrast . What is sharpening anyway, except increasing the contrast between lighter and darker adjacent edges.

Hosted photo: posted by ChasP505 in
./showthread.php?p=109​07426&i=i158759449
forum: RAW, Post Processing & Printing

Looks way better than the Focus Magic version. The latter just looks like cranking up the contrast.

Having some spare time this morning, I got to wondering about LR3 sharpening, which is said to be deconvolution when the Detail slider is all the way up to 100, and how it compares to Focus Magic. In the two versions below the first is with Detail panel settings 40/3/100/0 and Clarity at 30. The second is with the same plus Local Adjustment Brush on the girl with Exposure, Contrast, Clarity, and Sharpness all at +50.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

bohdank wrote in post #10909909
Looks way better than the Focus Magic version. The latter just looks like cranking up the contrast.

I actually have Focus Magic and used it on thousands of real estate photos over the past few years, but I used a NIK filter on this photo. I used the Tonal Contrast filter. I painted it heavily on the woman and the driveway area, lightly on the house, lawn, garden, and trees.

As for sharpening, when I just want light sharpening, I've been using the NIK sharpening app, Raw PreSharpening, with the strength dialed back lower than the default level. NIK filter work with layer masks, so it's easy to paint the effect just where you need it.

tzalman wrote in post #10905243
Not strictly true. The details are there, just blurred - i.e. spread out over too many pixels. Deconvolution sharpening can calculate and subtract the blur, just like "Enhance that," on CSI.

Yeah, but that only can take you so far in my experience...