Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

jettredmont

macrumors 68030
Jul 25, 2002
2,731
328
That just blew my mind. The panorama infill would have taken hours if not days to do properly by an incredibly skilled touch-up artists. I'm literally speechless. Like we're living in the future or something.

Just remember: we're seeing this at 480 pixels across, and that's a several-thousand-pixel-across image. Turn on the zoom and I suspect you'll still have several hours of "cleanup" to do, and to get that cleanup right will require an incredibly skilled touch-up artist. Watch the video again. Even in the first scene, where he deletes a leaf under the bench, note that the shadow isn't quite right afterwards. In the resulting desert scene there are lots of cloned objects which can easily be seen (which he alludes to in that this is a head start, not a completed image at that point).

Don't get me wrong: this is truly magical stuff. But, it's not like you'll be able to get the same results as someone who really knows what they are doing. And, IMHO, nothing screams amateur hour like someone using one of these tools to change a photo from a depiction of reality to something not real, but not going the rest of the way to make it look right. Its just that if you are someone who really knows what you're doing, the first ~50 steps (picking/cloning/blending) in your 1,000-step workflow are done for you.
 

ValSalva

macrumors 68040
Jun 26, 2009
3,783
259
Burpelson AFB
" It's like magic! Philosophically, is this good though? Purists would cringe at this sort of thing. "

Who gives a crap.

The purists will whine and moan and blog and comment about how its not "photography" any more, while the new jack young guns are securing clients and making money :cool:

You must be in advertising where everything is fair game. Is photojournalism on its last legs?
 

jclardy

macrumors 601
Oct 6, 2008
4,170
4,400
This stuff is amazing, it will probably need a beast of a computer to do it that fast but i'm willing to wait for the amount of work it saves.
 

TheSailerMan

macrumors member
Apr 22, 2006
48
0
New York, New York
Wow. I just... I... Wow. :eek:

My mind is blown. I don't think I've ever been more amazed by a piece of software.

I used Photoshop CS3 to make a panorama of Citi Field (the NY Mets' ballpark) last year. I still have the .psd with all the white space - I wonder what this would do to it...
 

rickvanr

macrumors 68040
Apr 10, 2002
3,259
12
Brockville
That is absolutely wild. I'm sure it's exciting from a professional stand point with time saving/ ease, but as a beginner/ novice it makes some pretty intense editing look within reach.
 

Moof1904

macrumors 65816
May 20, 2004
1,053
87
Yes, it's amazing...

...but if you need support you'll still get the same, horrible support experience that Adobe now offers, and

...the tool probably requires less processing power than the Flash movie describing it!
 

admanimal

macrumors 68040
Apr 22, 2005
3,531
2
Who said the people at Adobe are lazy? ;)

Neither this nor the content-aware scaling that someone else mentioned in this thread were originally developed by Adobe.

The content-aware scaling was developed by MERL (Mitsubishi Research): http://www.graphics.rwth-aachen.de/uploads/media/imret_02.pdf

EDIT: OK I was half wrong about the first part. The content-aware fill was developed by a couple guys from Princeton and a couple from Adobe: http://www.cs.princeton.edu/gfx/pubs/Barnes_2009_PAR/index.php
 

Consultant

macrumors G5
Jun 27, 2007
13,314
34
...but if you need support you'll still get the same, horrible support experience that Adobe now offers, and

...the tool probably requires less processing power than the Flash movie describing it!

LOL on the flash part. You might be on to something.
 

jdylan

macrumors regular
Dec 31, 2006
137
0
Bagram, Afghanistan
Purists?

It's like magic! Philosophically, is this good though? Purists would cringe at this sort of thing.

Well, all it's doing is making something easier, something that we all do anyway. It's all just art anyway. When I take 35mm photos, I'll break off a branch or a blade of grass, or go remove some trash before taking the photo. Right now, with digital photos, I airbrush stuff out. Purists are living in a fantasy world. What about the photographer places things IN photos before taking them, like the one's who place a teddy bear in the street when taking pictures of suicide bombings or something similiar? We all "tweak" photos, some before, some after.

Remember hearing about those old "ghost" pictures from the turn of the century, when people used smoke and mirrors to project an image of a "ghost" and then take a picture of it? On and on...
 

Doctor Q

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 19, 2002
39,838
7,649
Los Angeles
I hope it's not like those products that look great on TV but fail when you get them home and try them yourself. I'd love to get my hands on this healing tool and try it on my own images.
 

Mac OS X Ocelot

macrumors 6502a
Sep 7, 2005
603
0
That is freaking amazing. If you told me this video was a hoax, I'd believe it. Especially the last part with the panorama. If you said it was a whole image that they cropped and simply uncropped it, I'd believe that.
 

velocityg4

macrumors 604
Dec 19, 2004
7,329
4,717
Georgia
This would be great for amateurs just to remove tourist from pics of historical monuments. It takes a while to get rid of people in shorts with fanny packs milling about some ancient temple.
 

doug in albq

Suspended
Oct 12, 2007
1,449
246
Just remember: we're seeing this at 480 pixels across, and that's a several-thousand-pixel-across image. Turn on the zoom and I suspect you'll still have several hours of "cleanup" to do, and to get that cleanup right will require an incredibly skilled touch-up artist. Watch the video again. Even in the first scene, where he deletes a leaf under the bench, note that the shadow isn't quite right afterwards. In the resulting desert scene there are lots of cloned objects which can easily be seen (which he alludes to in that this is a head start, not a completed image at that point).

Don't get me wrong: this is truly magical stuff. But, it's not like you'll be able to get the same results as someone who really knows what they are doing. And, IMHO, nothing screams amateur hour like someone using one of these tools to change a photo from a depiction of reality to something not real, but not going the rest of the way to make it look right. Its just that if you are someone who really knows what you're doing, the first ~50 steps (picking/cloning/blending) in your 1,000-step workflow are done for you.


+1

I would like to see these images at 100%.
 

bearbo

macrumors 68000
Jul 20, 2006
1,858
0
In the last example, where did the bird in the left upper corner come from? If you watch the video in full screen, you can clearly see a bird-like thing in the content-aware filled area, but not anywhere else. Is content aware THAT good that it adds object from a library of things?
 

FrenchKheldar

macrumors member
May 1, 2006
83
0
Atlanta, GA
I don't like it

I mean sure it's amazing technology but this is scary from an information and science point of view... It's going to be tougher and tougher to distinguish reality from fiction and this is something we should all keep in mind. This is one area where maybe some kind of DRM should be used in order to track things that are truly authentic... And I'm sorry for the people who are comparing this to setting up a shot. You're still working with the real world there... Removing/adding objects that completely change the environment is something radically different and something that should be under serious ethical scrutiny... I'm sure marketing/advertisement companies will love this and that's fine... I just think this is an example of what is possible to do very quickly with a simple workstation and that could be used in many nefarious ways.
 

I-Eat-Flowers

macrumors newbie
Mar 24, 2010
29
0
In the last example, where did the bird in the left upper corner come from? If you watch the video in full screen, you can clearly see a bird-like thing in the content-aware filled area, but not anywhere else. Is content aware THAT good that it adds object from a library of things?

i was about to post the same thing...
that bird makes me think that this whole video is fake...
 

Mac OS X Ocelot

macrumors 6502a
Sep 7, 2005
603
0
In the last example, where did the bird in the left upper corner come from? If you watch the video in full screen, you can clearly see a bird-like thing in the content-aware filled area, but not anywhere else. Is content aware THAT good that it adds object from a library of things?

April Fools!

Is my bet. It would be a hilarious, if risky, move by Adobe.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.