What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Ready. Set. Shop view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com Black Friday Sale starting 11/25 3PM PST. No Lines, No Crowds, Click and Save.
95 Comments
- PhotoStory, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Almost forgot to mention: a plugin for GIMP is available. The software is free.
- lmarso, on 04/16/2009, -0/+4Not smart blur, not "photoshop move over".
Instead, simply one of the best performing denoiser algorithms on the market.
The downside? No simplicity, none at all. However, given time, experimentation and practice manipulating the various perameters, beats Noise Ninja and its Windows commercial imitators hands down.
The fact it's the handiwork of a few french theoretical mathematicians with limited english proficiency hasn't helped the cause of user friendliness. - newtontwo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Comments comparing to Photoshop are irrelevant. Please stop them. This is a mathematical tool, a set of algorithms designed to solve a complex set of PDE's relating to a matrix of pixels, AKA image. His method is describing a way to do, yes, things that can be done, but in a more efficient manner, some people are concerned with speed and wasting flops, even if it has no application in the real world. For those of you who seem so above it, you would do well to spend some time reading this http://www.greyc.ensicaen.fr/~dtschump/data/cahier_greyc05-01.pdf
This is someones research, it is more likely Adobe will license his method, or offer him a contracting job than it is his intention to "replace photoshop". - CarpetFilter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Photographers, like myself, often use de-noising tools to fix grainy images. These tools are quite complicated. The two most popular at Neat Image and Noise Ninja. Typically, they require a portion of the image to sample which contains only noise - no image detail at all. An example might be a completely uniform patch of blue sky or a shot of a color target in uniform lighting. The samples can be saved and used to de-noise images from the same camera with the same settings.
The examples on the linked site would not be acceptable for use in the photographic world, unless your goal is to make the photo look like a painting (which is, admittedly, a common artistic job). The technique clearly reduces detail in the images, which is exactly what most high end noise reduction software is designed not to do. - Namco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"WTF?! Just use the good ol' clone stamp and spot heal brush. They do a better job."
Yeah, but can you do it in 8 seconds with the click of a button? - Coletrickle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1hm, looks alot like "smart blur" to me
- sosuke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Great algorithm, but the post is misleading, this is not a contender for Photoshop. Awesome work on the noise reduction thought, good alternative to Noise Ninja for cheap production.
- rawsteak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1sure the cage is gone, but now the parrot is doing some david copperfield in his claws with the smoke and the cage gone and the goiv flayben!!
- mohrt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2installing under ubuntu:
use synaptic package manager and install g++, gimp, libgimp-dev, gtk, gtk-dev
tar zjvf greycstoration-0.2.0.tar.bz2
cd greycstoration-0.2.0
./configure
make
sudo make install - tazamore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yes, a skilled a Photoshop user could do better touchup on each of these images but that's not the point.
The point is this software is using an alogrithm to do a reasonable job of what usually has to be done manually which means this could be applied to video frames which means it could be used to remove logos from video and improve the clarity of low-res videos. - swaxhog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Thanks, now I'll believe those CSI shows when they clean a 50x magnified photo to crystal clarity.
- Ballwalker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That may just be blur, but it's an AMAZING blur algorithm.
- Svenson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm guessing everyone who dugg this sucks with photoshop and is amazed by the watercolor filter
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"I don't know about "move over photoshop", but these certainly appear to be as good as the results one can expect from using a combination of noise reduction and smart blur in PS CS 2"
-jimgardner1973
but if that's going to be your primary use for it, would you pay $500 for photoshop CS2 or would you pay ZERO dollars for these plug-ins in GIMP? - steelsun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's not great, but it's a nice concept and theory that will probably have it's workingd integrated into Adobe PS sooner or later.
One of the things I liked it's it's over smoothing capabilities, much like the effect you get with the Buzz Simplifier filters, but free instead of $$$$ - buddhistMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"It's just Smart Blur."
Sorry, but no, it isn't. I defy you to import one of the sample images into Photoshop and replicate the results using Smart Blur (or Median Noise, or any other standard filter, for that matter). This technology is something I've been looking for for years. Kudos to the inventors. - tafkase7en, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This has to be the lamest Digg story I have ever seen. I honestly thought It was a joke when I looked at the caption removal picture and saw easily that it was just blurred out. This is ***** stupid.
- DigitalDud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I tried to run it on a graphic with jpeg artifacts and it didn't do anything, in fact it added artifacts. Just did a -restore, don't see any other options.
- SirNuke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Photoshop is much better, but Photoshop is expensive. This isn't as good, but it won't increase the cost of your computer by 50%. Keep that in mind all of you "This is crap, photoshop is much better!" people.
- liz4rd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0All you non graphic designers obviously know ***** all ^_^
- tituskashmarek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0this is horible...how the hell did this get so many diggs?
- Misanthrope, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sweet! I have some... *ehem*... photos of my ex that I took with a crappy old webcam, here's hoping that I can get some more... *ehem*... use out of them...
- nrpieper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Blick, blick, blick!
- Boofster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So umm...how do you try this under Windows?
- idesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0as an experienced photoshop user... this is all possible with other PS plugins and with results that look much better than that crap.
- svloco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Resize fixing is alright. But the other removing checkboxes and and cage, text is done quite badly, all the blur marks are clearly visible.
- Kitsune818, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is just a filter.. it's been made a plug-in for GIMP. If it were truly useful it would/will eventually be made into a photoshop filter..
I don't see how this has any effect on photoshop at all.. I think the trend here at digg is to make your descriptions as spam-like as possible to get it onto the front page. Pretty lame, in reality. - obscured, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0hah. did you see the parrot? or the office space pic? they're terrible.
a noob photoshopper learning the clone stamp tool could produce better results. - kcab9705, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@obscured
you have 11 seconds for the Office Space pic, and 4 minutes and 11 seconds for the parrot photo (right next to the thumbnails on the page)
put your money where your mouth is and lets see these better results, surely you're above a noob...right? - ever, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The sample images are just waaay too sh*tty. Since when was denoising used primarily on making
***** images look just a tiny bit less *****. Working on decent photos is what I'm interested in, as are many of the people who really use Photoshop for something other than smart blurring pimples :).
If I made my living on digital graphics, I WOULD pay $500 for CS2 any given day if the alternative was GIMP. CS2's new noise reduction filter is nice. - DigitAl56K, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I bet if you used this in motion video the output would look like one of Enya's music videos.
- Brutal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Pretty impressive
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0wow, talk about computer noobs
- luma, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I ran some resize testing with this software. Not too bad, but kinda slow. Results here: http://svideo.org/greyc
- BlackPhantom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0WTF?! Just use the good ol' clone stamp and spot heal brush. They do a better job.
- Namco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Looks way better than smartblur IMHO.
- Technopope, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Coletrickle said:
to show people who dont know photoshop: http://maverick.dynasoft.nl/pics/blur.jpeg Copied from the site, right is how it was using this, left is done using smart blur, 1 filter 10 seconds. there is a difference, the edges are smoother on the right, but with a extra filter that can be done in photoshop easily.
So nice, but been there, done that.
So why didn't you do that, in Photoshop, "easily"? You showed a Photoshop example that wasn't nearly as good as the GREYCstoration example. In fact, there is a HUGE difference.
Why didn't you apply that "extra filter"? - mentor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Someone needs to add a plugin to a video streaming architecture, like Gstreamer, or whatever MythTV uses. Good bye logos.
(I'd like to see you do that in real time with PS :P) - ghostdog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"I'm guessing everyone who digs Adobe sucks with photography and is amazed by the Smart Blur filter"
"I would never use that professionally. But maybe if a friend asked for a quick favor.
The quality is not all that good and I get better results (and control) at the lab."
You are all saying the same things that old-school photographers used to say about photoshop.
I had a photography teacher once who could do everything Photoshop does,but analog,in the LAB*.Takes time,sure,but he preferred that way, just like you don't mind extra work or costs, as long as you can do/pay it in Photoshop.
* obs:yeah,i know that actually it's Photoshop that imitates a lab not the reverse,just making a point,call it poetic license if you will or whatever. - TheProfessional, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Its noise removal is not as good as Neat Image.
- MadMan2k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Not too bad. The pattern removal is pretty impressive, but the noise removal and image scaling aren't..
Focus Magic has image scaling capabilities that seem to work fairly well, not magical like what you see on TV but good:
http://www.focusmagic.com/ - Coletrickle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0to show people who dont know photoshop: http://maverick.dynasoft.nl/pics/blur.jpeg Copied from the site, right is how it was using this, left is done using smart blur, 1 filter 10 seconds. there is a difference, the edges are smoother on the right, but with a extra filter that can be done in photoshop easily.
So nice, but been there, done that. - Xopl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0SEXY!
- crash331, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Pretty lame. Does a really crappy job and takes out ALL the detail. Noise Ninja is a lot better.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Whoever wrote this Digg doesn't know Photoshop CS2 very well. It's native de-noise plugin does as good of a job. If that's not good enough, there are several others available.
For impainting, you can use the clone tool and quickmasks. Not as quick as an automated algorithm, but the results will be better.
As for removing subtitles, FFDShow does that too. - SteveIreland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Photoshop has no competition with whatever did those.Those are some of the worst denoisings I have ever seen. I agree with the guy that said it looks like "smart blur," all the details are just gone. Looks like a wax museum. NO DIGG!
- freemdoom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0you've got to be kidding. Almost indetectable? Look at that big blurry grid on the parrot!
- fustercluck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Pretty impressive for an "automated" tool. The reconstructs are startling, the inpainting and resizing are pretty good, and the noise removal is impressive.
A replacement for Photoshop? No. Another arrow in P'shop/GIMP's quiver? Definitely. Good find. - Philipp_Lenssen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Does anyone have a step-by-step guide on how to get this to be included in the GIMP?
- mathie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That is really nice. Thanks for sharing
-
Show 51 - 96 of 96 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 