How to effectively sharpen a photo.

mariahlullaby

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 19, 2005
852
1
NYC
I have a lot of concert photos that I took without a flash and too fast...as a result they are all very blurry.

Is there a way to sharpen digital photos fairly effectively? I've been resizing them and using the "sharpen" layer in PS, but that's it. I am not professonal!

An example:

 

cookie1105

macrumors 6502
Mar 27, 2006
426
0
London, UK
Sorry, but as far as I know there is no way to sharpen a photo as blurry as that.

But the best way that I know is the Unsharp Mask in Photoshop.
 

mariahlullaby

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 19, 2005
852
1
NYC
cookie1105 said:
Sorry, but as far as I know there is no way to sharpen a photo as blurry as that.

But the best way that I know is the Unsharp Mask in Photoshop.
That's the worst example, yes...but I will play around some more. Thanks!
 

pdpfilms

macrumors 68020
Jun 29, 2004
2,383
0
Vermontana
A photo like this cannot be fixed. Sharpening does not make out of focus objects in focus, nor does it fix blur.

Your blurriness is due to camera shake. A tripod or faster shutter speed will fix this, and unfortunately, the above pictures are not going to be fixed.
 

iGary

Guest
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
pdpfilms said:
A photo like this cannot be fixed. Sharpening does not make out of focus objects in focus, nor does it fix blur.

Your blurriness is due to camera shake. A tripod or faster shutter speed will fix this, and unfortunately, the above pictures are not going to be fixed.
What he said.

For less dramatic issues, though, Noise Ninja rocks the house (Photoshop plugin).
 

cube

macrumors P6
May 10, 2004
16,584
4,783
Maybe with the new algorithm from MIT/U. of Toronto. Probably a one/two years wait.

But your photo seems blurred by slow shutter speed, not shake. It cannot fix that (or depth of field).
 

ChrisA

macrumors G4
Jan 5, 2006
11,609
408
Redondo Beach, California
Some of the blur in your photo was caused by subject motion which is not preventable but much (most?) was caused by camera shake which could have been prevented by using a tripod and a remote shutter release. You can see that this is the case because of blur in the not moving objects in the frame No software can fix anything this far gone.
 

ChrisA

macrumors G4
Jan 5, 2006
11,609
408
Redondo Beach, California
cube said:
This is the same technique used to process the images from the Hubbell Space Telescope before they installed the corrective optics. De-convolution.
The byproduct is noise. It will create some artifacts in the image.

In simple terms the trick is this -- first you determine what the image of a geometric point against a black background would look like if the camera moved the same way. You get a white squiggling streak treat the streak and your blurred image as functions of (x,y) and the corrected image is the convolution of the two. There is a fast algorithm that involves Fourier transforms

The key thing they've done, it seems is to find a way to compute the "wiggly streak". This was not easy. the rest has been known for many years.

Not unlike described here: http://www-structmed.cimr.cam.ac.uk/Course/Convolution/convolution.html#whatis
 

cube

macrumors P6
May 10, 2004
16,584
4,783
iMeowbot said:
But:
The mathematical model, however, cannot correct other kinds of blur, including inadequate depth of field in which images are out of focus. The model also cannot compensate for slow shutter speeds for fast moving objects such as cars.
I said that before.