this post was submitted on
281 points (80% like it)
372 up votes 91 down votes
shortlink:

pics

subscribe2,334,513 readers

16,216 users here now

Looking for an image subreddit with minimal rules? Check out /r/images

A place to share interesting photographs and pictures. Feel free to post your own, but please read the rules first (see below), and note that we are not a catch-all for general images (of screenshots, comics, etc.)

Spoiler code

Please mark spoilers like this:
[text here](/spoiler)

Hover over to read.

Rules

  1. No screenshots, or pictures with added or superimposed text. This includes image macros, comics, info-graphics and most diagrams. Text (e.g. a URL) serving to credit the original author is exempt.

  2. No gore or porn. NSFW content must be tagged.

  3. No personal information. This includes anything hosted on Facebook's servers, as they can be traced to the original account holder. Stalking & harassment will not be tolerated.

  4. No solicitation of votes (including "cake day" posts), posts with their sole purpose being to communicate with another redditor, or [FIXED] posts. DAE posts go in /r/DoesAnybodyElse. "Fixed" posts should be added as a comment to the original image.

  5. Submissions must link directly to a specific image file or to an image hosting website with minimal ads. We do not allow blog hosting of images ("blogspam"), but links to albums on image hosting websites are okay. URL shorteners are prohibited.

  • If your submission appears to be filtered but definitely meets the above rules, please send us a message with a link to the comments section of your post (not a direct link to the image). Don't delete it as that just makes the filter hate you!

  • If you come across any rule violations, please report the submission or message the mods and one of us will remove it!

Please also try to come up with original post titles. Submissions that use certain clichés/memes will be automatically tagged with a warning.

Links

If your post doesn't meet the above rules, consider submitting it on one of these other subreddits:

Comics  
/r/comics /r/webcomics
/r/vertical /r/f7u12
/r/ragenovels /r/AdviceAtheists
Image macros Screenshots/text
/r/lolcats /r/screenshots
/r/AdviceAnimals /r/desktops
/r/Demotivational /r/facepalm (Facebook)
/r/reactiongifs /r/DesktopDetective
Wallpaper Animals
/r/wallpaper /r/aww
/r/wallpapers /r/cats
The SFWPorn Network /r/TrollingAnimals
  /r/deadpets
  /r/birdpics
  /r/foxes
Photography Un-moderated pics
/r/photography /r/AnythingGoesPics
/r/photocritique /r/images
/r/HDR
/r/windowshots
/r/PictureChallenge
Misc New reddits
/r/misc /r/britpics
/r/gifs Imaginary Network
/r/dataisbeautiful /r/thennnow
/r/picrequests /r/SpecArt
/r/LookWhoIMet
  /r/timelinecovers
  /r/MemesIRL
  /r/OldSchoolCool
  /r/photoshopbattles

Also check out http://irc.reddit.com

a community for
to anything interesting: news article, blog entry, video, picture...
message the moderators

MODERATORS

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

280
281

Adobe DeBlur Technology (i.imgur.com)

submitted ago by mrhunter1337

all 53 comments
sorted by:
best
best
top
new
hot
controversial
old

[–]nighthawk454 32 points33 points ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyOSDcfME1U

Amazing technology. Basically, they take an image, then calculate how the camera must have moved in order to make the image blurred in this specific way, and then they undo it.

[–]lazydictionary 17 points18 points ago

The important thing is this only deblurs pictures where the camera moves, not just a blurry photo.

[–]hamdinger 77 points78 points ago

Apple is totally going to invent this in like two years, then sue the shit out of Adobe for stealing it retroactively.

[–]sadf 4 points5 points ago

Wouldn't be shocked if it was built into the iPhone 5. Apple usually announces some hip newish feature each iPhone model and that would be a pretty killer feature to have. Blur-proof camera phone? Sheeeit.

[–]skinnypilot 2 points3 points ago

The new Lumia 920 has a special lens that's kinda blur-proof. We'll see when the first batch of reviews are out.

[–]SpecklePattern -5 points-4 points ago

Blur-proof you say?

Tons of booze and the world is so blurred, that even this obviously voodoo-style magic can not fix it. Although, for science, it would be nice reason to get drunk and test this unblur-magic ;)

[–]randomly-generated 0 points1 point ago

Drunks are so annoying.

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]3LollipopZ-1Red2Blue -1 points0 points ago

bye bye apple lover. you can take your ignorance back to http://www.patentlyapple.com/ where it belongs.

[–]Dysgalty 4 points5 points ago

Oh my god that guest guy is annoying as hell.

[–]Sokaii 0 points1 point ago

He reminds me of that guy on Ironman 2.

[–]narrowstairs 0 points1 point ago

That would be Rainn Wilson, aka Dwight Schrute.

[–]Aepko 25 points26 points ago

This is some actual CSI enhancing bull shit

[–]ThePerfectBoob 13 points14 points ago

Once photoshop makes a 1080p picture from a 150x zoomed in reflection on a hub cap 200m away, then I'll believe CSI.

[–]gd42 0 points1 point ago

One disregarded fact about CSI (and the likes) is that when we re-watch them in 10 or 15 years later (when the bullshit they use on the show becomes reality) they will look less dated compared to today's realistic crime shows.

[–]NiteShadeX2 1 point2 points ago

A talented photoshop artist could do that, but we all know how accurate it'd be.

[–]kampfy3 8 points9 points ago

"After numerous hours spent painstakingly reconstructing the damaged pixels based off of an algorithm I created, I have concluded that the suspect is driving a 1997 Geo Metro with New York license plate number FARTDICK."

[–]NiteShadeX2 1 point2 points ago

"Why is his face a penis?"

[–]HydroCrank 0 points1 point ago

Once Photoshop can do this...

[–]asdfman123 6 points7 points ago

I want to know what algorithm they use, and what code they implemented, to produce Magic Pixie Dust and do crazy shit like this.

[–]GuyYoureThinkingOf 2 points3 points ago

If they had it enhanced by hardware - say an acceleromometer - and tied it into the software, I'd imagine it'd make the software even more accurate.

[–]r0bbiedigital 0 points1 point ago

Turbo Pascal, with a little inline assembly. definitely pascal....

[–]rasputine 0 points1 point ago

per the video up top, it analyzes the blur to figure out the direction in which the camera moved to create the blur, then uses that information to correct it.

[–]asdfman123 1 point2 points ago

Yeah, I'd guess something like that--it's easy to express that--but actually coming up with something that deals with all the complexities and works well is another thing entirely!

[–]engelsgs 5 points6 points ago

ENHANCE! rapid typing ensues ENHANCE! further typing VOILA! We can now see the suspect's face perfectly.

[–]ThisWontFrontPage 2 points3 points ago

Adobe blur technology can also reverse this to the point where the DeBlur technology doesn't work. Hooray!

[–]int_argc 9 points10 points ago

Gaussian blur != motion blur hth

[–]andyhenault 3 points4 points ago

Is this available yet?

[–]deliciousONE 1 point2 points ago

demon magic!

[–]swagtothemaximum 0 points1 point ago

Where is this?

[–]Col_Rolf_Klink 3 points4 points ago

I think it's the Kodak Plaza right next to the Chinese Theatre in Hollywood, CA.

[–]cocorobot 1 point2 points ago

It's in LA. I took nearly the same picture two years ago on vacation. Apparently I could keep my freakin arm still.

[–]MunKeeX 0 points1 point ago

Holy shit. That is amazing.

[–]ideamagnet 1 point2 points ago

Imagine what this could do for old archived images. What new evidence it could bring to light!

[–]Gavinardo 0 points1 point ago

Or even frame-by-frame breakdowns of famous blurry footage. Ah hell, like that classic Bigfoot footage or something.

[–]pioneertothefalls 0 points1 point ago

My jaw hit the desk.

[–]print_is_dead 0 points1 point ago

No pleya la musica en la promenade!

[–]EggyJS 1 point2 points ago

Magic

[–]DrunkAndAngry 0 points1 point ago

Anyone else wish Rainn Wilson would have just shut up that whole time?

[–]gfunk363 0 points1 point ago

this is incredible wow

[–]mike91188 1 point2 points ago

shut up Dwight Schrute!

[–]Mike_Wazowskis_Eye 0 points1 point ago

Enhance. Enhance... Enhance.

[–]SackRack 1 point2 points ago

This is a repost, down vote. Cool technology though.

[–]MyDogAteIt -1 points0 points ago

Not just a repost, but also an advert.

[–]Anim8me2 0 points1 point ago

Yeah... just came to shit on this because it later came out that the demo was kinda faked. They took a clear image and blurred it. Then they "de-blurred" it.

[–]tanget_bundle 9 points10 points ago

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

For those who are curious – some additional background on the images used during the recent MAX demo of our “deblur” technology. The first two images we showed – the crowd scene and the image of the poster, were examples of motion blur from camera shake. The image of Kevin Lynch was synthetically blurred from a sharp image taken from the web. What do we mean by synthetic blur? A synthetic blur was created by extracting the camera shake information from another real blurry image and applying it to the Kevin Lynch image to create a realistic simulation. This kind of blur is created with our research tool. Because the camera shake data is real, it is much more complicated than anything we can simulate using Photoshop’s blur capabilities. When this new image was loaded as a JPEG into the deblur plug-in, the software has no idea it was synthetically generated. This is common practice in research and we used the Kevin example because we wanted it to be entertaining and relevant to the audience – Kevin being the star of the Adobe MAX conference!

[–]My_First_Pony 1 point2 points ago

Can you provide a source? I'd like to know about it.

[–]Anim8me2 0 points1 point ago

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2011/10/18/adobeclarifies

[–]rabidkamikazi -2 points-1 points ago

San Antonio?

[–]h8bit 1 point2 points ago

This... shouldn't really be possible, should it? I mean, that blurred photo contains less unambiguous data than the unblurred version.

It doesn't make sense to me.

[–]jrupac 1 point2 points ago

This is motion blur, which is different from a Gaussian blur which is essentially a smoothing of image data around each pixel.

[–]ducatiduke -3 points-2 points ago

Frack! I have been deleting all of those pictures. Sh*t!

[–]Password-123 -3 points-2 points ago

This is probably going to end up /r/KarmaConspiracy.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2012 reddit inc. All rights reserved.

REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

π Rendered by PID 19425 on app-06 running 8e56ab8.