What is the best way to sharpen a blurry photo without using the "Sharpen" filters in Photoshop?

[photo_nerd]

Hello All,

 

I have taken a photo that is a bit blurry that I would like to try to salvage. Does

anyone have any good techniques that I can use to try to accomplish this? I shot

the photo in color; but, have since converted it to grayscale.

 

Most of the blur is around the edges and in the details areas (i.e. eyes, nose,

mouth, etc.). I tried to burn around these areas to add a little more detail;

however, this did not work too well. Also, applying the different sharpening filters

and using the sharpening tool did not help at all.

 

Should I just try to rescale the image to a smaller size? If so, which dimensions

(_____x_____) would be approximately equal to 8.2MP?

 

All responses are greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks!

 

 

P.S.

Just ot add more color to this issue, I believe the reason why the image is blurry

is that for some reason when I open a RAW file in Adobe RAW Converter (not

sure which version I have; but, it's bundled with CS3) my images are blown up to

about 25MP at about 220ppi (I think) when I shoot on an 8.2MP camera. I am

almost certain this is where the loss of detail is coming from.

[pkallos]

First, try the native RAW converter that comes with your camera. I find Canon DPP produces better images than with ACR.

 

Next, "Smart Sharpen" is pretty good.

 

Otherwise, you can try high pass filter sharpening. Just google that and you'll find lot's of examples of how to do it.

[ellis_davison]

I would also suggest you try a high-pass filter teechnique. I follow John Paul Caponigro's technique, downloadable here: http://www.johnpaulcaponigro.com/downloads/technique/technique.php#testfiles

 

(I don't know how to do a link, so you will need to copy and paste to your browser.)

 

This, to my mind, simulates the classic analog "unsharp mask" better than the PhotoShop filter.

 

Also, your 25 megabyte file is normal. Your file has three colors, so 8.2x3=25. Between the camera firmware and the raw processor, three colors are interpolated into each sensor site, even though each site is filtered to pick up only one. (My command of this part of the digital magc is limited.) In other words, your raw processor is operating as it should and is not contributing to a sharpness problem.

[dave_dube]

Hey Nerd! Please remember, we are all nerds to some extent (I know, speak for myself).<P>

 

I'm thinking your question about the file size and the answer that Ellis gave are 2 different things.<P>

 

When you have your image open in the RAW converter, at the very bottom of the image in 'blue' font will be a link and probably the size your referring too. Click on that link and readjust the settings to your cameras native size. Now, that said, that is the perfect spot to upsample and image prior to processing. My settings are:

Space ~ ProPhoto RGB; Depth ~ 16 Bits/channel; Size ~ 17.4mp (native size is 12.2 mp) and Resolution ~ 300. These settings are just for editing purposes.<P>

 

Since your blur is most noticeable in areas of transition, you'll need to work on that. You'll need to define the light and dark without creating a halo. One starting point might be to create a copy layer, open UM, push the Radius up all the way and the Threshold down all the way and then sharpen approx 40%. When you go back to the file, you can turn down the opacity of the layer. You might also try changing the mode to 'Luminosity'.<P>If you were proficient with PS, my recommendation (not seeing the photo) would be Smart Sharpen as Peter mentions. In the Advanced mode you'd have total control of the Highlights and Shadows needed to make something 'appear' sharper. The final step could be the HP filter, remember, you need to do it on a separate layer and you may need to change the blend mode.<P>Good Luck!

[photo_nerd]

--Peter and Ellis, thanks for the advice. I'll try the high-pass technique when I get home this evening.

 

--Dave, I am refering the blue link at the bottom of the page. It defaults to 25MP and 240ppi and I did all of my editing there and exported it to Photoshop to do some retouching. I didn't realize this was the setting until I made all of my edits in PS.

 

I must admit that I am a novice and am learning as I go along. Since my camera shoots 8.2MP which settings should I use when I edit my photos in ACR? One mistake it seems that I am making is that I leave my depth at 8 Bits when editing and usually just keep the default settings .

 

What would be the best space, depth, size and resolution to use for editing? Also, when I'm done editing, should I convert the image back to the native 8.2MP and 8 Bit depth before exporting it to Photoshop?

[geoffs1]

If you want to get really "nerdy" about removing focus errors, you can try http://refocus.sourceforge.net/

 

I also use ProPhoto, 16-bit as the "working space" for all my serious editing. Almost universally, I convert to 8-bit sRGB for my output JPEG, although if I know the recipient is color-space aware, I sometimes send AdobeRGB images (and some customers are sophisticated enough to specifically ask for a particular format/color-space/bit-depth).

 

As always, I recommend three books: "Real World Camera Raw...", "Real World Image Sharpening...", and "Real World Color Management...".

[ellis_vener_photography]

"Blurry" as in not resolving edges well? "Blurry" as in the subject and / or camera were in motion during exposure? Or "Blurry" as in the subject is not in focus? what sharpening alogrithms do is refine tonal differences. Where there is a tone difference there is an edge and all of the various Sharpening and unsharp masking techniques techniques and plug-ins are designed to do one thing: enhance to some degree that difference.

 

"my images are blown up to about 25MP at about 220ppi (I think) when I shoot on an 8.2MP camera."

 

I think you are confusing mega pixels with megabytes. How big in pixels and in megabytes is the file ACR is rendering? A 25mp image would render a file (At 8bpc) as a 150 megabyte TIFF or PSD file.

[bryantan]

"A 25mp image would render a file (At 8bpc) as a 150 megabyte TIFF or PSD file."

 

Would it not be 25MP * 3 (bytes per pixel) / 1,048,576 = 71MB before compression? In any case, a 25MB is about right for an 8-bit TIFF from an 8MP camera.

[ellis_vener_photography]

""A 25mp image would render a file (At 8bpc) as a 150 megabyte TIFF or PSD file."

 

My math was off, According to Photoshop, a 5000x5000 pixel file (25mp) RGB at 8 bits per channel, creates uncompressed TIFF creates a file that is at least 71.5 megabytes. The more information in the file the larger the file would be but would be nowhere near 150mb.

[photo_nerd]

I just confirmed. It's actually the megapixel count that is 25MP. I confirmed this by saving the file and just multiplying the pixels and it came out to 25MMM. The actual file size came out to be about 28MB when I converted it to a JPEG. I also increased the dpi from 240 to 300.

 

I was surprised how the image still looked pretty good even though it was blown up from three times it's original size. I'm actually going to have some prints made to see how they turn out. I'm sure I'm missing some kind of technical aspect that says that a 25MP image blown up from an 8.2MP, without any sharpening, should not look as good as it does to my eyes on my PC.

 

Has anyone out there blown up an image in ACR to about two or three times the original size and printed good results? I actually put my order in for a 20x30 print to get an idea of this will look. I guess I'll find out in three day's time.

 

PN

[bryantan]

Without any examples (100% crops), no one can answer that question. What's "pretty good" to you might look horrible to me.

 

There is really no point in upsizing a 8.2mp image to 25mp to print at 20x30. But if you do insist, why don't you try and send the file in at native resolution, and then the upsized file and see if you can tell the difference between the two prints when you get them back.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

You might want to try Focus Magic. It's slow, but it works fairly well. You can download it and test it on 10 images before it asks for a license.

 

http://www.focusmagic.com/

 

Try different pixel settings and see what works best for your image.

[kari v]

"I'm sure I'm missing some kind of technical aspect that says that a 25MP image blown up from an 8.2MP, without any sharpening, should not look as good as it does to my eyes on my PC."

 

It's about the image content and quality and your standards. If it looks good then it's good, if it looks good on screen it'll be even better printed. Bryan's suggestion is good though, send it out at its native size and see how your printer handles it.

 

"Has anyone out there blown up an image in ACR to about two or three times the original size and printed good results?"

 

I've blown a 6Mp 35mm film scan to 20x30 and a 2,5Mp file from dSLR to 12x18 with very good results. (Not in ACR but it doesn't matter.) Don't get caught in the megapixel trap, there are great big prints made from well under 8Mp files / films. Also, viewing distance matters a lot. I've printed 20x20 from medium format slide which can be viewed at "photographer distance" (your nose limiting how close you can get ;). It makes me happy to know the detail is there but people visiting us don't look so closely and of course I don't normally look so closely. Local music store has about 4'x2,5' (yes, feet) blowup from b&w 35mm neg. It looks great from the distance people usually see it. Needless to say it's a mess up close but who cares?

[photo_nerd]

I got my print back last night and I surprised to see how well it turned out. I will sending a job from the native 8.2MP file for another photo that I would like to get blown up and framed and see how it turns out.

 

Now, I'm curious, how large could I blow up the 25MP file I sent them and still see good results? This was just a rhetorical question; thanks for the help guys.

 

:)