[Digikam-devel] [digikam] [Bug 279544] Tag image for unsharp pictures

[Axel Krebs]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=279544

--- Comment #5 from Axel Krebs <axel.krebs at t-online.de> ---
I can tell you just- some considerations.

Thank you for the links, content, I read with great interest.

"sharp or blurry .. subjective": you are right, and, maybe even more
difficult, it might be intentional in certain cases. I agree.

The smple for fast moving object is another topic, which comes
instanteneously in my mind: but in contradiction to that, there should
be a possiblitzy to "filter" any linear or even non-linear movement. And
derive a sharp pic inversely, when substraction the dislocation vector.

I am happy that you seem to be able to take care of this issue. For my
opinion, this inverse procedure could be an intelligent way to sharpen
even blurry pics- under the precondition, that there is a (mathematical)
linear movement involved. mathematoical linear. I mean, a movement path
which coul be a strauigtgt line, a periodic ("wavy") function or
something similar.

!!
I guess, we should distinguish between filterung blurry pics ("BPF")
 and gaining sharp pics from ones the the blurry because of moving te
lens while exposing a pic.
!!

Am 31.03.2013 11:44, schrieb Gowtham Ashok:
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=279544
> 
> Gowtham Ashok <gwty93 at gmail.com> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                  CC|                            |gwty93 at gmail.com
> 
> --- Comment #4 from Gowtham Ashok <gwty93 at gmail.com> ---
> I have used a concept similar to autofocus in the code.
> Better Explanation:
> http://www.howstuffworks.com/autofocus3.htm
> 
> Yes, after image is taken, we do not have any data about the distance of the
> camera from the subject(that is why we have to use passive autofocus).
> 
> Sharp or blurry is somewhat subjective. There are also cases where the
> photographer intended to give a blur effect, or while taking a shot of a
> fast-moving object.
> http://img.ehowcdn.com/article-new/ehow/images/a05/ah/vv/fast-f1-car_-800x800.jpg
> 
> So, if we can take care of this, we can probably have a useful image
> classification algorithm.
> We can also combine this with face detection algorithm to give better output.
>

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.