I don't care for getting information from videos or presentations...the production culture seems alienating to me. In this one, for instance, I fail to see the need to have Dwight from "The Office" chirping along like a demented Ed McMahon—and what's the premise for that brief snippet of ancient Bachman Turner Overdrive? Were we supposed to reflect briefly back on blue-collar workers of the 1970s? But whatever: I think you'll agree that the substantial content of this makes it worth watching. You might want to hit full screen.
If you can't see the video here, here's a link to use.
(Thanks to Carsten Bockermann and others)
UPDATE: As several readers, including cfw and Christopher Lane, have pointed out, Adobe has admitted that one of the images used in this demo was faked. Dpreview has the details.
Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2011 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.
Featured Comment by Kevin Purcell: "More technical details online (in written form :-) http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2011/10/behind-all-the-buzz-deblur-sneak-peek.html and the paper that kicked this off seems to be this one at this year's SIGGRAPH http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~yoavhacohen/nrdc/. From the abstract:
This paper presents a new efficient method for recovering reliable local sets of dense correspondences between two images with some shared content. Our method is designed for pairs of images depicting similar regions acquired by different cameras and lenses, under non-rigid transformations, under different lighting, and over different backgrounds.
"Note the 'correspondance between two images' bit. You need a matching image for this magic to work...but that might be a sharp but poorly composed one in a putative further product. Note also that this works not just for getting the PSF for deblurring but can also be applied to tone (color) correction and trasferring a known mask to a new image (the latter is less interesting for still photographers, I think). Currently it's research work. Not product work (AFAICT) though I'm sure Adobe are working on that. The paper is in light version (3MB) http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~yoavhacohen/nrdc/nrdc.pdf or best quality (47MB!) version http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~yoavhacohen/nrdc/nrdc_siggraph11.pdf."
Featured Comment by struan: "Twenty years ago I very nearly did my PhD with a group which developed one of the first fairly robust ways to deblur images in a reasonable time without having to handhold the algorithm—important, because it is easy to push the deconvolution to give the highly biased answer you first thought of. As it is, I became more of an experimentalist, but still did a lot of image processing.
"'Faked' is too harsh. Synthetic blur is a standard procedure when you are testing algorithms. It makes the test more controlled, and is really no different from using light from a collimated test target when testing lenses.
"An expert can get amazing results out of these sorts of algorithms. The problems come when real-world pictures meet anumerate users looking for a single button to push. If you have a blur shape (kernal) which is substantially smaller than the whole image and which, crucially, is constant across the whole frame, then even automated systems can do a good job. I used programs which could impressively deblur things like number plates on speeding cars in about fifteen minutes of chugging on an IBM AT.
"For photographic applications the biggest obstacle is that there can be multiple sources of blur, and that they vary across the image. Motion blur with long lenses isn't too bad, even with short depth of field. However, with wide angles the splodge that results from moving the camera is different for objects close to the corners than for those in the middle. You can start trying to construct different kernals for the different parts of the image, but then your kernal is roughly the same size as the sub-image which leads to all sorts of problems with artifacts, false positives and good old signal-to-noise.
"I can see a use for this counteracting the effect of tiny dim apertures at the long end of a handheld superzoom, but how many of those users buy Photoshop? The technology really needs to be built into the self-print stations they now have in photo shops, or the web-interface of an online printer."