3 ms·
Side note: depth of field blur is not a gaussian blur but a bokeh blur. Most software uses gaussian blur to fake depth of field but this always looks unnatural.
by thdrdt 6y ago
Side note: depth of field blur is not a gaussian blur but a bokeh blur. Most software uses gaussian blur to fake depth of field but this always looks unnatural.
Bokeh blur looks more like a lot of circles.
If you compare the iPhone 11 blur with the SE blur it looks like the SE is using bokeh blur which looks much more natural.
- kqr 6y agoIt's more subtle than this: bokeh blur can look very different depending on lens design and configuration. It can look like toruses (tori?), various sided polygons, stars, double overlayed low-pass circles with resonance at the edges, ovals shaped and rotated into a full-picture swirly effect, and so on and so forth. Depth of field blur is a very organic effect and in many cases part of the signature look of lens designs. It is not just one, parameterless filter one can apply to an image.
- mrtksn 6y ago>depth of field blur is not a gaussian blur but a bokeh blur This is one of my main problem with those big-time YouTubers. Since the portrait mode on the iPhone come out, all other manufacturers followed and all these reviewers made this into "Who would extract the head of a person and blur the background" contests and they kept praising the phone that would do the sharpest extraction. As if those people never saw an actual DoF blur? Then some manufacturers start adding random bokeh flares... It's one of those things that keep my faith in Apple, they actually have people who know a thing or two and don't jump on the next race of megapixels/bezel to body ratio/ISO or whatever next fad race is. This "who would do the sharpest edges around the object on portrait mode" contest annoyed me so much that I quit watching gadget reviewers. Next time I watched reviewer videos they all were talking about "Which company does the best color science" and quit again.
- ska 6y agobokeh is one of those terms that is often misused, as it does not describe a type of "blur" but the aesthetic characteristics of how out of focus elements look from a particular camera & lens. You can apply the same thing to algorithms. Like many lenses though, so far they all have really bad bokeh. You are quite right that the optical effects are far more complex than a single gaussian blur applied on a background mask. They are also much more complex than the modeling currently being done with limited depth information, or even worse, faked depth information.
- sandofsky 6y agoAuthor here. I believe all the added-blurs in the post were done via our app, not the first-party camera. It is indeed modeled after real bokeh. Both the 11 and SE were blurred by the same code. It's possible that since the SE's data is worse, making it less exaggerated.