New answers tagged post-processing
2
Sorry, but pragmatically the answer is no. There is no good way to go from a processed file back to the process used to get there. One can guess, but it's a very hard problem for a computer — it's just too complicated with too many possibilities.
(Of course, that's exactly the kind of thing machine learning is good at untangling, but I can pretty much ...
4
Even the same exact camera will not demonstrate the same "exact" noise characteristics on successive shots. But techniques such as "dark frame subtraction" or other noise reduction processes that measure unexposed areas of the sensor and other characteristics of the noise generated by the camera's circuitry will be "close enough for government work."
Image ...
0
I use this website upscalepics to be very valuable. They use neural networks based on artificial intelligence. It basically predicts and puts some details to your photos with high accuracy making them look high resolution.It is optimized for photos and you can get pretty good quality pics up to 8x upscaling.
3
No, it doesn't mean that the noise is predictable for any sensor or any sensor type: something which is predictable isn't noise, almost by definition.
What it does mean is that sensors of a given type used in a given way may have similar statistics to their noise: although the actual noise varies randomly, it obeys a 'noise model' which tells you what sort ...
1
FLOAT in your command represents the type of data that should follow the argument, a floating-point number. Just like -i PATH means -i <the path to the image file>, the --focus argument expects something like --focus 0.786 or similar.
I have no idea what an actual useful value might look like as I have no idea about the specific thing you're trying to ...
0
There's a trick I use to attempt to 'reverse-engineer' what may have been done to a photo in post.
It's imperfect because it relies entirely on guesswork - without access to the untouched original you're never going to know the actual start-point. If you have a start point & an end result you can confirm your guess. Without, it will always remain a guess....
0
Of course it is. just take it with a lower shutter speed like 2 secs or even more if you can. the reflection will be fantastic. Just note that everything inside the frame must remain still for that 2 or so seconds.
2
Absolutely it is possible. Do an image search for "mountain reflection water", to see countless examples. Here's one of Mount Hood reflected in Mirror Lake, Oregon, U.S.A, from Wikipedia:
From Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain from US Federal Highway Administration
Not not convinced they weren't edited to get the effect? Add "Ansel Adams" to the search, to ...
4
Yes, it is possible.
The key to getting the reflection to mirror all of the subject at the same size is to shoot at as low an angle to the surface of the water or other flat, reflective surface, as possible.
The higher the camera is above the reflective surface and the larger the angle between the lens' optical axis and the reflective surface, the greater ...
Top 50 recent answers are included
