Using software to correct blurry digital photo?

[GunsMadeAmericaFree]

With 3 kids, it is hard to get a decent photo with all of us together (have to get someone else to hold & use the camera throughout), at least 1 kid is usually not smiling, or another is making a face, etc.

Anyway, we got a decent family Christmas photo at church, but evidently our Sony Cybershot DSC-H300 was out of focus. The issue took care of itself once it had been turned off, then back on, but unfortunately that did not help with the photo I really liked, which is blurry.

Is there any way to use software to "fix" the blurriness? Knowing that the issue was simply that the lens was out of focus, I was hoping that there might be a filter or something we could try using to correct it.

Thanks so much!

 

[MrSquished]

I don't think anything like that exists unfortunately. Not that I've heard of. Gotta get that focus in camera.

 

[IronWing]

You can reduce the size and then sharpen to sort of fake it. The pic is too far out of focus to get good results from sharpening alone as the sharpen filters will end up pixelating the photo. Of course, you end up with a smaller photo.

 

[GunsMadeAmericaFree]

Dang - I was hoping if a person knew the exact model of camera, you could find the info about the lens, and then some software could infer what was done incorrectly with the lens out of focus. If a physical lens could be out of focus, I was hoping that the computer might be able to run several dozen trials, using some sort of software adjustment to approximate a slight adjustment of the lens, essentially using math to "correct" for the incorrect positioning of the lens. In such a way, I was hoping a couple of the results might be a photo with better focus.

 

[shortylickens]

Sharpening at the same time as reducing. Thats it. The problem with blurring is that you actually have less data to work with. Too many neighboring pixels are the same. Software cant really do so much. Same issue with extreme overexposure or underexposure. Too many similar pixels, which is a lack of useful data, which cant be manipulated very much. Thats why in general its better to take very large, sharp photos when possible, then afterwards you can safely reduce size, or soften, or brighten or dim, and they'll still look good. And for the love of Thor, keep the originals!

I recommend you get a bean bag that your camera can sit in to reduce vibration. Or a monopod. Get a high quality flash and when possible, aim it at the ceiling. Reflected light from the ceiling usually looks much better than a hard light pointed directly at your subject.

 

[shortylickens]

OK so according to DPreview that camera model is decent for casual shooting, but its not great in low light, both because of weak gain and difficulty focusing. One of these days you should treat yourself to a modern power zoom or mirrorless. Try to spend at least 250 dollars. Maybe check Amazon after christmas. Also look at some buyers guides.

The best camera bargains

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that might be a bit older but still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

www.dpreview.com

OR, get a nice phone. I have found modern smartphone cameras to be so much better than ye olden days, and for the average person they take more than acceptable photos. My Nokia 7.2 is pretty darn good, and a nice bargain today.

Next thing is get some free or cheap editing software and teach yourself how to use it. That would have actually been a great quarantine hobby. I have a 20 year old copy of Corel Photo Paint and amazingly its still quite versatile today. Mostly because that JPEG 2000 format never took off and also because it can import RAW.

 

[shortylickens]

 

[GunsMadeAmericaFree]

Wow, ceiling was about 30 feet up in this instance, (and peaked, not flat) so we would have needed a REALLY bright light!

 

[AnandThenMan]

Was able to bring out a bit more clarity.

 

[killster1]

you can make a 4k video then take a photo from the video where everyone is clear / eyes open / smiling etc.

 

[shortylickens]

you can make a 4k video then take a photo from the video where everyone is clear / eyes open / smiling etc.

IF he bought a camera that does 4k video.
He does not have one.

 

[killster1]

IF he bought a camera that does 4k video.
He does not have one.

you know a lot about the OP (items they have and dont have!)

 

[Steltek]

The only kind of camera I have ever seen that allowed pictures to be re-focused after being taken was those Lytro light field cameras. However, they had enough drawbacks that Lytro shut down 3-4 years ago.

 

[sdifox]

Try darktable https://www.darktable.org

 

[BarkingGhostar]

I thought one of the last big features from 2020 on the Adobe Creative front was the ability to de-blur images.

 

[SKORPI0]

 

[shortylickens]

that looks ok but its just a standard softening effect which many programs can do.

 

[shortylickens]

I used Deblur under Corel Paint Shop without sharpening or softening and while it brought out some detail it also made everyone look crazy.

 

[Steltek]

Unfortunately, there just isn't sufficient detail in that photo to meaningfully improve it in any way except by downsizing it.

Maybe in a few years AI will improve that (just look at some of the video clips of old SD TV shows on Youtube like Babylon 5 that have been AI upsampled to 4k to see the potential), but it just isn't there yet.

It will be interesting to watch the technology develop, though, if only to see where it goes.

 

[Yourbro]

What’s the cheapest way to do it?

 

[shortylickens]

What’s the cheapest way to do it?

GIMP is free and has lots of online support from regular people.

 

[mindless1]

I used Deblur under Corel Paint Shop without sharpening or softening and while it brought out some detail it also made everyone look crazy.

But that's not your fault. Nobody gets to pick their parents!

Kidding aside, I'd just increase brightness and contrast and do an unsharp mask, experiment with a radius >4, then maybe another unsharp with half the prior radius. It'll still be a bit blurry but won't look over-processed.

 

[shortylickens]

unfortunately, nothing can work here as well as you imagine it in your head.)
just take another pic and use a tripod

read the OP again.
there is no retaking this photo.
he's trying to fix it.
yes, eventually he will need to learn the fundamentals like multi-shot and proper auto-focus but thats not his solution right now.

 

[trenchfoot]

With group photos, I will always take at least three shots of the group per pose, do a quick chimp and adjust if necessary. As shortylickens had mentioned, bouncing flash (diffuser optional) is a given when possible, especially when folks insist on keeping their flash reflectors (eyeglasses) on.

Can't remember how many times the auto focus switch somehow mysteriously gets turned off, especially when taking photos at fast moving events at night with two cameras on slings.

I prefer working with primes if occasion allows, although shooting candids is harder in limited space environments.