New high iso NR technique - image deblurring from two exposures

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by frederick, Jul 16, 2007.

  1. frederick

    frederick Guest

    (Also posted this link in rec.photo.digital)

    Link to PDF file from MS:
    http://research.microsoft.com/~jiansun/papers/Deblurring_SIGGRAPH07.pdf

    It's a large PDF, so for a smaller example of the effectiveness that the
    researchers achieved see:
    http://i8.tinypic.com/639btvn.jpg

    Suggested implementation is dual exposure mode at two iso settings built
    in to camera firmware, presumably with in-camera processing and
    combining to a singe de-blurred low noise "high iso" image.

    Main limitation seems to be that a "single, spatial-invariant blur
    kernel" is assumed, hence as with current mechanical IS/VR systems,
    motion-blur of a moving subject isn't going to be corrected automatically.
     
    frederick, Jul 16, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. frederick

    Julian. Guest

    The only thing new about this is that it's electronic.
    The original (film version) unsharp mask used near identical OOF images to
    create a single sharp one.
    This sounds like shame shit, different day stuff to me.

    JA
     
    Julian., Jul 16, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. frederick

    frederick Guest

    You either didn't read the paper, or didn't understand it.
     
    frederick, Jul 16, 2007
    #3
  4. frederick

    acl Guest

    However, that's not at all what is described in that article.
     
    acl, Jul 16, 2007
    #4
  5. frederick

    RichA Guest

    Interesting, but averaging of noise in images also works. Take 10
    1600 ISO shots, combine them, you end up with less noise than a 200
    ISO shot. It's been done for 20 years or more using programs like
    Registax.
     
    RichA, Jul 16, 2007
    #5
  6. frederick

    ASAAR Guest

    And has been responsible for dozens of wedding photographers being
    shot by furious brides and MOBs. Wedding photographers for the most
    part are exceedingly timid, and no longer use this excellent but
    controversial technique. But don't let that discourage you enough
    so that you don't use it whenever you have the opportunity.
     
    ASAAR, Jul 16, 2007
    #6
  7. frederick

    John Sheehy Guest

    Noise would scale by 1/(10^0.5) = 0.316. For shot noise, that would be
    like an equivalent of 10x as many photons, or ISO 160; true. For read
    noise, it would depend on the camera. For many cameras that have no
    high-ISO optimization, it would be about 1600*0.316, or ISO 506, for read
    noise. For some Canon DSLRs, read noise would be 1/2 stop less than at
    ISO 100 (20D/30D/5D).

    Any fixed pattern noises will not disappear with the stacking, though.
    You need to subtract a stack of black frames, and that will increase the
    read noise by 41%.

    --
     
    John Sheehy, Jul 21, 2007
    #7
  8. frederick

    RichA Guest

    I thought you needed to use flat frames for fixed pattern noise?
     
    RichA, Jul 21, 2007
    #8
  9. frederick

    RichA Guest

    Wedding photography? The "fast food" of professional photography,
    just a notch above shooting school class group pictures? Never
    thought about it for a microsecond.
     
    RichA, Jul 21, 2007
    #9
  10. frederick

    ASAAR Guest

    That's merely another to be appended to the extremely long list of
    things you haven't thought about. Every field of endeavor has a few
    with stellar talent, a large number of covering a broad range of
    competence, and a few clueless dunces. Would you consider U.S.
    Presidents to be the "fast food" of American politicians, judged
    solely but the current occupant? I'm quite certain that there are
    some extremely talented wedding photographers that don't practice
    their craft as if it required no more talent than flipping burgers.

    If anything, your many pointless OPs and replies are nothing but
    usenet's equivalent of "fast food", the latter not good for the body
    and the former not good for the mind. Now that you've enjoyed the
    first course of my reply, would you like fries with that? :)
     
    ASAAR, Jul 21, 2007
    #10
  11. frederick

    RichA Guest

    Stellar talent? Why would any photographer possessing that even GO
    into wedding photography?
     
    RichA, Jul 22, 2007
    #11
  12. frederick

    ASAAR Guest

    Because he/she enjoys doing something well? Because his taste
    buds were shot off during the war, ruling out continuing the career
    as master chef, and thought that wedding photography would be more
    interesting and rewarding than flipping burgers? With your immense
    writing talent, why are you wasting your time in this newsgroup when
    you could become rich(p.n.i.) and famous by turning your OPs into
    graffiti? It wouldn't be any less inane, but it could certainly be
    more colorful. Steal some spray cans and make a name for yourself!
     
    ASAAR, Jul 22, 2007
    #12
  13. frederick

    RichA Guest


    Side issue;
    Personally, I'd like to see all real taggers shot on site. Like
    looters in a war.
     
    RichA, Jul 22, 2007
    #13
  14. frederick

    ASAAR Guest

    You and GW (Texecutioner) Bush have yet another thing in common.
    I'll bet you're not smart enough to figure out what the other shared
    trait is. :)
     
    ASAAR, Jul 22, 2007
    #14
  15. frederick

    RichA Guest

    That we leave the bleeding hearts for condemned murderers up to stupid
    liberals to display?
     
    RichA, Jul 22, 2007
    #15
  16. frederick

    ASAAR Guest

    Yep, you've proved my point. Two peas in a pod. And with this
    last sentence, you even gracelessly stumble over your words, just
    like the big enchilada with the small sombrero. :)
     
    ASAAR, Jul 22, 2007
    #16
  17. frederick

    RichA Guest

    True to form, leftists HATE divergent opinions and would stamp them
    out if given the chance. Off to Red China with you.
     
    RichA, Jul 22, 2007
    #17
  18. frederick

    ASAAR Guest

    <g> You've done nothing but prove my point again. Your complete
    lack of logic would make Shrub and his minions proud! I've said
    nothing about hating divergent opinions, nor have I said that I'd
    stamp anything out if given a chance. You, on the other hand, have
    said that you'd like to see graffiti artists shot. In your attempt
    to smear *me*, you've pretty much described yourself, substituting
    "leftist" for "right wing nut".

    I wouldn't mind visiting China though. According to Globe
    Trekker, the food is excellent. Now if someone can just convince
    G.T.'s Megan McCormick to invite me, my bags will be packed in a
    flash, cameras ready, waving goodbye to all of my wingnut fans. :)
     
    ASAAR, Jul 22, 2007
    #18
  19. frederick

    John Sheehy Guest

    That's for corner roll-off, sensor dust, etc. Things that affect apparent
    exposure.

    --
     
    John Sheehy, Jul 22, 2007
    #19
  20. frederick

    RichA Guest

    Smear you? Catalog, maybe.
    Good luck surviving it.

    Tainted Chinese Imports Common
    In Four Months, FDA Refused 298 Shipments

    By Rick Weiss
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Sunday, May 20, 2007; Page A01

    Dried apples preserved with a cancer-causing chemical.
    Frozen catfish laden with banned antibiotics.
    Pet Food Recall
    Scallops and sardines coated with putrefying bacteria.
    Mushrooms laced with illegal pesticides.
    She isn't aging well, unfortunately.
    Legend in your own mind...
     
    RichA, Jul 22, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.