3 ms·

Wow, that's very impressive, and very un-intuitive (to me) that it's possible at all. So, who is the first to dig out some pictures that were 'redacted before

• DanBC 11y ago
  Law enforcement have large libraries of images of child sexual abuse. Sometimes the abusers appear in the photo but blur their faces. There's probably some work happening to identify those abusers. Here's one famous example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Paul_Neil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Paul_Neil There's a bunch of other image processing stuff that can be done. Identifying location from sparse clues is important. Identifying wall paper patterns, or coca-cola bottle labels gives clues.
• bnegreve 11y ago
  > Wow, that's very impressive, and very un-intuitive (to me) that it's possible at all. Indeed, there is no free lunch. This is only possible because the restoration algorithms are making some rather strong assumptions about the original picture. For example, they assume that evey blury area in the blury picture has a corresponding sharp edge in the original picture. It works fairly well on pictures with a lot of sharp edges such as the ones in the article: buldings, text etc. I'm guessing that it wouldn't work as well on natural landscapes or human faces, because they don't usually have edges likes this. For example, in this restored picture, http://hsto.org/storage2/9d8/554/c15/9d8554c156e63a213797502e4d5b9075.png http://hsto.org/storage2/9d8/554/c15/9d8554c156e63a213797502... the sky in this picture contains edges that do no exist in the original picture. The algorithm is trying to find edges where there are none. This is a very visible impact of this assumption.