10 ms·
Photoshop CS5's new "Content-aware Fill"
- pkulak 17y agoYou have got to be kidding me. Amazing. Every photograph will have at most 50% original area after this gets into the average photographer's hands.
- potatolicious 17y agoAnd this is why I shoot mostly film... with digital it's too easy and tempting to resort to parlor tricks instead of taking a genuinely good photograph.
- frio 17y agoI just scored a semi-nice film SLR the other day; it used to belong to my parents but they've gone digital and it hasn't been used in yonks. It's certainly nowhere near as programmable as even a cheap digital SLR, but whatever, it's fun to use. The difference, in terms of taking shots, is night and day - with my digital camera, I'll snap 10+ shots of the same thing to try and find the right one; with this, I spend five minutes angling around and trying to find the right shot off the bat. I'm not a good photographer by any means; in fact, I'm substantially below average if I'm honest about it. But raising the bar to entry certains makes you focus on what you're doing a lot more. Which I guess is a long and winding way of saying I agree. It's more fun when there' more effort involved.
- potatolicious 17y agoI feel the same way - there's a greater sense of accomplishment when you allow yourself only a single opportunity to capture what you see in front of you. In photography parlance we call it chimping - i.e., jumping around like a monkey and clicking the shutter like crazy, trying to get the right shot. Even if you get the right one, you have no idea if it's your skill, luck, or just law of large numbers... When I shoot film I feel more purposeful - I rarely ever take more than a single exposure of any one particular thing - it also teaches you to be patient, and hold the shutter until you know you have the right shot. On rapid-fire you will often get a good picture, but no idea what makes it good, whereas with film I'm aware that this picture works because, say, I waited until there was no one in the background. My current favored camera is a Leica R4s - only manual and aperture priority modes, manual focus, manual aperture control, and only 2 metering modes (you only ever need one - center-weighted). When you strip a machine down to the bare minimum it opens a lot of creative doors.
- angusgr 17y agoI shoot film (as an amateur) by choice (sold my DSLR last year), but I still scan all of it, so every now and again it still gets tempting to give it the PS treatment..
- jacquesm 17y agoWhat do you use for a scanner ? And using what film formats ?
- angusgr 17y agoI used to have a second hand Minolta Scan Dual IV, which is a dedicated 35mm scanner. I've since started shooting 35mm & medium format, and I sold the Minolta and bought an Epson V700, which is a flatbed. I also used an Epson 4490 while I was in NY for a while last year, really good value for money. I haven't updated my flickr site for a while, but you can see some here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/angusgr/tags/film/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/angusgr/tags/film/ And to see the best the Epson can do, see here: http://flickriver.com/groups/466058@N21/pool/interesting/ http://flickriver.com/groups/466058@N21/pool/interesting/ (This last link exploits the rule that good photos are made with any combination of technology. ;).)
- jacquesm 17y agoThanks, sorry for the late response. I have a friend (Wiktor Wołkow) in Poland that has an archive of about 150,000 images, no backups. It's his life work, most of it is 35 mm, some on 60x60, he's been a professional photographer his whole life long and the thought of a fire there scares me. So I have been thinking off and on about how to tackle that job, it would take quite a bit of time and money to do it properly.
- angusgr 17y agoThere was a company a couple of years ago that did outsourced bulk film scanning. You basically sent them your film en masse, they sent it to India and had it scanned there, and then sent you back the film and the scans. Couldn't find them with a quick google though, they may not have survived the GFC.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- MHordecki 17y agoThat made my day. I'm kind of worried though that the examples are hand-picked, and by default it doesn't look so nice. I would love, though, to know the algorithm behind this.
- wallflower 17y ago"PatchMatch: A Randomized Correspondence Algorithm for Structural Image Editing" http://www.cs.princeton.edu/gfx/pubs/Barnes_2009_PAR/index.php http://www.cs.princeton.edu/gfx/pubs/Barnes_2009_PAR/index.p...
- SandB0x 17y agoWhich in turn is heavily based on "Space-Time Video Completion": http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~vision/VideoCompletion.html http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~vision/VideoCompletion.htm...
- noidi 17y agohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgKjs8ZjQNg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgKjs8ZjQNg
- noidi 17y agoWhoops, I got beat by wallflower. Should've refreshed the comment page before posting...
- jsonscripter 17y agoDon't worry, I like the direct link to the video better :)
- wallflower 17y agoAs do I. Seriously, I love the Google-foo/showdown challenges that sometimes a HN reader poses. This search was easy.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- nso 17y agoThe demo is totally mind blowing. It's so good it almost seem fake (not saying it is).
- TNO 17y agoThe bottom right area of the last image example makes me wonder...
- wesley 17y agoI don't see anything special in that area?
- Timothee 17y agoI would say the fact that the "created" mountain goes down outside of the selection with no real reason behind that. Though I'm not saying that it's not real. It would dumb for Adobe to make up such an impressive video.
- Qz 17y agoIf you look at the cloud area above the 'created' mountain, then look at the slope to the left of the mountain (inside the panorama) and the cloud area above that, you can see that it's very similar. My guess as to how this works is that it looks some distance in from the selection edge, and then repeats that outward (or inward), but matches up the edges to the selection. You can see it in the deleted road where the 'desert' on the bottom right of the new area matches the brush to the left of it, but the rest matches the brush to the top and right of it. It's like creating a seamless tiling background, except instead of doing it in a square, it does it in an arbitrary selection path.
- cma 17y agoI don't think so; it looks like it does a lot of stuff in the frequency domain that you wouldn't get by just smearing inwards or outwards along the surface normal of the selection.
- Sindisil 17y agoOutstanding! On a quick look back when it came out, I didn't see anything in CS4 to get me to upgrade from CS3. I'm thinking I need to reevaluate with CS5. If nothing else, perhaps the total diff from CS3 -> CS5 will now be worth the upgrade.
- makmanalp 17y agoThinking how many so called "graphics designer"s have just been replaced by a machine makes me smile and shudder at the same time.
- ThomPete 17y agoNot graphics designers. The hours graphic designers have do spend one something they hate so much has been replaced by a machine. And for that we are very grateful.
- thorax 17y agoThese kind of problems for graphic designers are like software bugs to developers. Now they'll get to spend more of their time "coding features" instead of debugging.
- makmanalp 17y agoThat's why I said "so called". Being a graphic designer involves much more than just touching things up in photoshop.
- davidedicillo 17y agoyeah, that saves a lot of time. I'm sure for serious jobs you really need to go back and touch up things, but this is a pretty good first pass.
- ThomPete 17y agoA serious job is a job you get paid for. I can't tell how many times removing that tree or expanding that picture just 50 pixels can mean the world.
- hkuo 17y agoI don't believe any amount of technology will ever remove a human out of a creative task. Technology can offer tools and speed and power, but it is worth nothing without a creative mind to make use of it. I mentioned this in another comment thread, but there was an article about Gary Kasparov discovering that a human supported by a computer can beat both a human or a computer alone. Technology simply makes mundane tasks easier so more energy can be spent on creative possibilities.
- dutchflyboy 17y agoI think I just lost my jaw!
- aphyr 17y agoThis is absolutely amazing. The PS guys are really pushing the envelope of image editing. I think it's really cool that the editing process is more structural, more high-level, than working with the basic tools. The lens flare removal, especially, is an incredibly common and tricky problem. At the same time, I am glad that the effects are still immediately visible, even in a low-res youtube video. It's nice to have hints of what the original actually looked like, some times.
- illumin8 17y agoIt is indeed a great algorithm. I think similar algorithms will be used to "create" music in the future, although I shudder to think of how terrible pop music will be when they can just create "content aware" music by selecting a few bars and generating the rest.
- quadyeast 17y agohope they do away with the buggy/frustrating flash panels
- ThomPete 17y agoI guess it wont work with complexity behind complexity. Two people, one in front of the other for instance. But it's damn nice for most situations.
- hkuo 17y agoWith all the crap Adobe gets for Flash, this is where their primary area of expertise lies. I've been using Photoshop from when there were no layers and very limited number of undos. They never fail to deliver something incredibly useful and time-saving with each iteration.
- fnid2 17y agoI'm still using Photoshop 4 that I got in 1996 or so. There are layers, but only one undo. I don't use it enough to justify the upgrade, but I have done a lot of everything in this video from time to time and it is extremely time consuming. This is quite an advancement. I usually give Adobe a lot of crap, but this is really very nice. But I wonder... are tools like this to manipulate reality making really less and less interesting. Are losing our love of reality because of the dreams we can so easily create?
- jacobolus 17y ago> it is extremely time consuming. Most importantly, it’s not especially interesting. Figuring out what needs fixing takes a human eye, but actually cutting a distracting pole or bit of lens flare out of a picture is work for a patient robot. > Are losing our love of reality because of the dreams we can so easily create? Um... no? How do you define “reality”? If it depends on what can be shown in photographs, then the time to have this discussion was around 1850.
- brfox 17y agoLens flare is kind of nice sometimes. I like how CG movies add it in to make it look more realistic.
- jamesbritt 17y ago"Are losing our love of reality because of the dreams we can so easily create?" Our dreams drive us to create a better reality.
- JeanPierre 17y ago
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- voidpointer 17y agoThis is going to be really nice when cleaning up old photos with dust and scratches
- elblanco 17y agoThe panorama example at the end is fantastic. I hate cropping all of my panoramas down, I loose so many great things on the edges.
- froo 17y agoI was pretty impressed just by the first part, but when it got to the desert and finally the cloud, my jaw literally was open by the end. Totally gobsmacked. Unbelievable.
- WildUtah 17y agoWow. Now I need this in the GIMP.
- patrickas 17y agoThis is amazing and all, but this technology has been available for GIMP users for years. I have been using something very similar since 2004 or 2005. http://www.logarithmic.net/pfh/resynthesizer http://www.logarithmic.net/pfh/resynthesizer This page http://slacy.com/blog/2005/04/cool-image-processing/ http://slacy.com/blog/2005/04/cool-image-processing/ shows you how to use it to remove an object which will be automatically replaced by surrounding texture (similar to first example in video) This page http://schwarzvogel.de/resynth-tut-sa.shtml http://schwarzvogel.de/resynth-tut-sa.shtml shows an example of growing and image by auto-filling the missing edges around a photo (similar to last example in the video) I suppose the new algorithms in PS are better, but still it's been over 5 years now :-)
- danudey 17y agoInteresting. Resynthesizer looks a lot like the technology (and end results) behind the spot healing brush tool, introduced in Photoshop CS2 in 2005.
- wisty 17y agoI thought of inpainting in GREYCstoration - http://cimg.sourceforge.net/greycstoration/demonstration.shtml http://cimg.sourceforge.net/greycstoration/demonstration.sht...
- bho 17y agowow. i'd definitely be interested in seeing the full image and seeing if there are any weird artifacts going on at the transition area between the selected border and the generated "content-aware" fill. from what i can tell , this is close to magic.
- sev 17y agoUnbelievable. My head is hurting from trying to imagine the concept behind the algorithm to do this. The desert and sky recreations are especially mind boggling.
- jcnnghm 17y agoMine too. My initial (naive) thought on developing something like this would be to have advanced users perform the tasks that I wanted to automate, and recording the series of actions that they took to perform the task so I could analyze it and try to find the patterns. How is something like this actually developed?
- joshd 17y agonoidi's yotube link explains it pretty well. It searches the rest of the image for sections that are similar to the edges of the deleted area and extrapolates from there. I imagine for large deleted areas this would have to be done multiple times to build up the deleted area. It woudl be kind of lie markov chains, but for image data. The current patch tool in Photoshop can already adjust contrast and hue to make a patch source match the patched area, so when the algorithm is searching for similar areas to use as a source it can just focus on the image details and not the lightness or actual colours.
- Tichy 17y agoIt reminds me of that other algorithm that went around a couple of months ago, where they do similar things by combining photographs on the web. Might have been from Google, Microsoft, or some independent researchers.
- stinky613 17y agoThis can only be described one way: devil magic
- sbhat7 17y ago"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- ansonparker 17y agoI'm pretty sure this isn't going to be in CS5. The engineer says as much and John Nack, who just posted it, says it'll be in a "future" version of Photoshop. Which, if I'm right, makes this a horrible way to steal CS5's thunder!
- superchink 17y agoAny confirmation on this?
- benologist 17y ago... content-aware fill, or MAGIC?
- rsully 17y agoThis is an amazing feature. The tree was removed perfectly. Cannot wait to see CS5
- jcl 17y agoThat was actually one of the less impressive things the demo did, since it replaced the tree with what is essentially a smooth gradient. This is something that can be done by early image inpainting algorithms, such as this one from SIGGRAPH 2000: http://www.iua.upf.es/~mbertalmio/restoration.html http://www.iua.upf.es/~mbertalmio/restoration.html
- jerf 17y agoYes, but you have to give it some credit for deciding to use a smooth gradient, when it is clearly not the only choice. (Also, it's hard to tell in this video exactly what it really replaced it with, at the pixel level.)
- Zakuzaa 17y agoOnly about 7 days left to the April Fools Day.
- wenbert 17y agoThe only thing that is keeping me from using Linux fulltime is Photoshop. I had to literally get my officemates to see that video. It is unbelievable.
- aero142 17y agoThis should make it easier for Iran to have successful missile launches. As long as they can afford the upgrade license. http://dvice.com/galleries/iranphotoshop/iranmissile_1.jpg http://dvice.com/galleries/iranphotoshop/iranmissile_1.jpg