Photoshop Unblur -- here's hoping it performs as advertised:

[Phopojijo]

http://9to5mac.com/2011/10/10/photoshop-unblur-leaves-max-audience-gasping-for-air/

Well... damn.

[neuro]

derp..

[JackalStomper]

ENHANCE

[neuro]

http://pleco.org/heh/see-if-you-can-enhance-that-license-plate.jpg

UNBLUR!!

[Timo]

It'll be awesome once stuff like this is inside cameras, firmware + lens stabilisation = awesome.

[Patrickssj6]

Unblur Google Earth :P

[Cortexian]

good thing it still can't un-pixilate.

[neuro]

now we just need un-crop

[dark navi]

It'll be awesome when this is inside Facebook to unugly all my friends.

[nuttyyayap]

I need this for my texturing :saddowns:

[Zeph]

If this is a motion tracking algorithm, this will be amazing when we get accelerometers in cameras to track the slightest of movements the camera made while the shutter was open.

[Cortexian]

If this is a motion tracking algorithm, this will be amazing when we get accelerometers in cameras to track the slightest of movements the camera made while the shutter was open.
Some cameras already do this don't they? Just on a lesser scale?

Maybe I'm thinking of those gyro-stabilizer things you can buy for $$$$$.

[Zeph]

They might have hardware stabilization, but this thing corrects the image data after it's been recorded from the sensor.

[Phopojijo]

Let's hope it works better than content-aware fill.

[Zeph]

Well, I think content-aware fill was pegged as the ultimate creation tool when it was really limited to a niche set of fills. This should work on blurrish things as long as it was taken by a camera and hasn't been skewed, stretched, or blurred with the blur tool.

[ThePlague]

Let's hope it works better than content-aware fill.:like: this.

[Cortexian]

Well, I think content-aware fill was pegged as the ultimate creation tool when it was really limited to a niche set of fills. This should work on blurrish things as long as it was taken by a camera and hasn't been skewed, stretched, or blurred with the blur tool.
It should work on a few artificial/electronic blurring techniques as well.

[Limited]

It should work on a few artificial/electronic blurring techniques as well.No, the plugin maps the trajectory of the camera movement, then uses algorithms to work out what colours need to fill the prexisting ones. Say for example some of the pixels shifted 5 spaces to the left, they would generally all blur in the same way.

Artificially blurred images do not have constantly 'moved' pixels, they blur the images using a collection of the pixels and averaging it (I think).

So it wont be possible because there is too much movement in the pixels in such a random pattern. Hense why this article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2047831/Adobe-shows-astonishing-unblur-feature-Photoshop.html) is using fake images which will never be able to fixed.

(for the lazy)
Before + After
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/11/article-2047831-0E546D1400000578-108_224x423.jpg http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/11/article-2047831-0E546CD900000578-130_224x423.jpg

^ impossible.

[Patrickssj6]

In terms of a matrix you have have the following example, each number representing a color, each position representing a pixel:
6-8-2
8-7-3
3-1-5

If you want to blur something you average out the numbers depending on the adjacent ones e.g.
6-8-2->7-7-3
8-7-3->7-7-4
3-1-5->4-2-4

The information of the original matrix is lost. Now you have multiple ways of getting the old matrix back, most of them are algorithms which analyze patterns.
Let's say you have a matrix like this:
7-7-3
7-4-7
3-7-7

It's quite obvious that there is a diagonal line (3,4,3). If you want to get the original value back you could guess
7-7-3
7-3-7
3-7-7

In very simple terms this is what these algorithms do. They cannot restore lost data but analyze the existing data and efficiently guess the lost one.

[Phopojijo]

No, the plugin maps the trajectory of the camera movement, then uses algorithms to work out what colours need to fill the prexisting ones. Say for example some of the pixels shifted 5 spaces to the left, they would generally all blur in the same way.

Artificially blurred images do not have constantly 'moved' pixels, they blur the images using a collection of the pixels and averaging it (I think).

So it wont be possible because there is too much movement in the pixels in such a random pattern. Hense why this article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2047831/Adobe-shows-astonishing-unblur-feature-Photoshop.html) is using fake images which will never be able to fixed.

(for the lazy)
Before + After
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/11/article-2047831-0E546D1400000578-108_224x423.jpg http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/11/article-2047831-0E546CD900000578-130_224x423.jpg

^ impossible.It's not a random direction... it's not a direction. You have every pixel bleed with their neighbours.

Think of it like each pixel contains a bell curve -- in a perfectly sharp image -- the bell curve goes to zero at the boundary of the pixel. As you (Gaussian) blur... the bell curve expands into neighbouring pixels -- and each neighbouring pixel does the same -- up to the defined radius.

There is work done with removing gaussian blur by use of fourier transforms (IIRC) but yeah. Also, cameras don't perfectly Gaussian blur -- it actually depends on the shape of the aperture as well -- hence "Bokeh".

[Timo]

http://i.imgur.com/qha1n.jpg
o_o

Blog post: http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2011/10/behind-all-the-buzz-deblur-sneak-peek.html