Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: felixpq on June 17, 2018, 09:22:14 am
-
I've taken the image below but unfortunately, the eyes of the bee are to soft (not sharp). I'm already an (relatively) old man and if I try all the possible technique and software I can find I'll be even older.
I came here because I was looking for a way to do this by myself, looking at ImageJ deconvolution method I wondered if anyone as done this before and I came across one of Bart (BartvanderWolf) post on this forum but it dated back quite a while. But the idea of analyzing the combo lens camera to find optimal parameters for deconvolution seem promising and though I understand in this image it might not help because it's not sharp to begin with.
So deconvolution, whatever sharpening, wavelets or anything else "method" is there hope I can improve this image or should I just dump it?
(https://www.flickr.com/gp/gauvreau-yves/8j86a9)
Bee 1 (https://www.flickr.com/gp/gauvreau-yves/04mc1i)
-
I've taken the image below but unfortunately, the eyes of the bee are to soft (not sharp). I'm already an (relatively) old man and if I try all the possible technique and software I can find I'll be even older.
I came here because I was looking for a way to do this by myself, looking at ImageJ deconvolution method I wondered if anyone as done this before and I came across one of Bart (BartvanderWolf) post on this forum but it dated back quite a while. But the idea of analyzing the combo lens camera to find optimal parameters for deconvolution seem promising and though I understand in this image it might not help because it's not sharp to begin with.
So deconvolution, whatever sharpening, wavelets or anything else "method" is there hope I can improve this image or should I just dump it?
(https://www.flickr.com/gp/gauvreau-yves/8j86a9)
Bee 1 (https://www.flickr.com/gp/gauvreau-yves/04mc1i)
I have found the Photoshop plugin Focus Magic to be the best at this sort of thing. But, even with the (slight) blurriness it is a great photo!
-
Just out of curiosity, what are the other options you think of for this kind of problem.
Just to name a few, I have Nick's suit, Gimp, ImageJ, Darktable, RawTherapee, Adobe CC photo and a few more for astro kind of stuff.
Thanks also for your comment.
-
I'm not sure if it uses deconvolution but within the Nik Collection Sharpener Pro (the Raw sharpener) is pretty good.
I also prefer Focus Magic but the Nik tool is worth a shot.
Allan
-
My opinion: Keep it until you get a better photo but don't spend too much time trying to "fix" it.
By the way, your insect is not a bee but rather a fly, specifically a type of Hoverfly (also called a Flower Fly, Family Syrphidae), probably Toxomerus sp.
-
My opinion: Keep it until you get a better photo but don't spend too much time trying to "fix" it.
I agree.
-
Thanks for the info about it not being a bee, it's about 40% if not less the size of bee. I'm probably as far away as Pluto when it's about insects, I'm just illiterate no less.
But they make awesome picture, that's all I know.
I gave a try to Focus Magic on this image and it's quite possible it uses some sort of deconvolution kernel but I don't really care about that. You'll be the judge of the result but I had to stack the result of FM on top of the original and use a mask to do selective "sharpening", it was what I wanted for the fly and flower, note that I called it a fly now, just joking but for the background it didn't work for me, way to much noise. Maybe there is still to much, I did this fast and dirty.
To me it still look a bit fuzzy but I'll admit it's better then it was. Do you agree?
I'm seeing new post as I write this, so I'll do as suggested and essentially try to get the focus right the next time.
Thanks you all
-
Looks like the magic really helped (better contrast, brighter, sharper). It's now a more appealing photo of a Hoverfly in a natural setting, even if the fly isn't entirely in focus.
These smaller Hoverflies are difficult to photograph well (I've shot hundreds of frames and still haven't gotten a shot I really liked).
-
I told you I was an old guy (memory is going), I just remembered, on top of FM, I did an highpass filter in LAB mode on the lightness channel only just to see and I think it's even better now.
-
Something is off on this LAB version (murkier, JPEG artifacts, etc.). The first Magic version you posted is cleaner.
-
I used the Nik output sharpener, heavy on Focus and Structure, then applied it selectively with a mask.
-
Peano,
all this is very difficult to evaluate objectively, it's like comparing apple an oranges, I have the originals raw files and you worked on a minuscule JPEG. I downloaded it just to see and of course I compared it to my own JPEG and I don't really like either to be honest.
The main point in all this is as Eric says, don't waste to much time on this or don't throw good money after bad or something like that.
I was looking at deconvolution as a potential method to improve this image but one of the first thing I found reading a paper on the method was that it failed miserably if you add noise to the equation or real life image in other words.
Thanks to all who reponded
-
Who cares about eyes when the butt is in focus? ;)