p.1 #1 · We don't need no stinking fast shutter speeds or IS or tripods!
"A new paper from Brown University demonstrates that blurry photos can ultimately create a sharper, higher-resolution image than if the picture were perfectly sharp."
Can you imagine what this technology means for still photography sometime in the future? Or, furthermore, if it works on subject matter that is moving!
Hmm, . . .even if your camera happens to already be inconveniently bolted onto your favorite tripod's head right when you desire a sharper, higher-resolution, image to be made, don't worry! Just grab two of your pod's closest legs with both hands and firmly start shaking them while at the same time you are crack off a shot or two with you trusty cable release clinched in your teeth!
PS, I cross-posted this to the Canon forum where I usually hang out. Having said this, its generally implied by omission that this newfangled, futuristic, earth shaking, technology will work on all smeared photos regardless of the camera brand used.
p.1 #5 · We don't need no stinking fast shutter speeds or IS or tripods!
I don't see this as being so great. There will be noise/artifacts in the image reconstruction that will destroy fine details. Pixel shitting is a better technology.
p.1 #6 · We don't need no stinking fast shutter speeds or IS or tripods!
Well, I guess I'll just throw away my tripods now. ;-)
Photonadave wrote:
"A new paper from Brown University demonstrates that blurry photos can ultimately create a sharper, higher-resolution image than if the picture were perfectly sharp."
Can you imagine what this technology means for still photography sometime in the future? Or, furthermore, if it works on subject matter that is moving!
Hmm, . . .even if your camera happens to already be inconveniently bolted onto your favorite tripod's head right when you desire a sharper, higher-resolution, image to be made, don't worry! Just grab two of your pod's closest legs with both hands and firmly start shaking them while at the same time you are crack off a shot or two with you trusty cable release clinched in your teeth!
PS, I cross-posted this to the Canon forum where I usually hang out. Having said this, its generally implied by omission that this newfangled, futuristic, earth shaking, technology will work on all smeared photos regardless of the camera brand used....Show more →
Sep 08, 2025 at 10:31 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.1 #7 · We don't need no stinking fast shutter speeds or IS or tripods!
Photonadave wrote:
"A new paper from Brown University demonstrates that blurry photos can ultimately create a sharper, higher-resolution image than if the picture were perfectly sharp."
Can you imagine what this technology means for still photography sometime in the future? Or, furthermore, if it works on subject matter that is moving!
Hmm, . . .even if your camera happens to already be inconveniently bolted onto your favorite tripod's head right when you desire a sharper, higher-resolution, image to be made, don't worry! Just grab two of your pod's closest legs with both hands and firmly start shaking them while at the same time you are crack off a shot or two with you trusty cable release clinched in your teeth!
PS, I cross-posted this to the Canon forum where I usually hang out. Having said this, its generally implied by omission that this newfangled, futuristic, earth shaking, technology will work on all smeared photos regardless of the camera brand used....Show more →
Very interesting.
The manual super resolution method I've seen basically requires no tripod, apparently slightly different framing yields higher resoltion ( like pixel shift, I'd guess.) I suspect they are getting the same info off a blurry photo
p.1 #8 · We don't need no stinking fast shutter speeds or IS or tripods!
At what point is a "recovered" photo no longer the same photo? When the subject's eye color changes? When their face is no longer recognizable? When they have two heads?
If you run a random recovery processes on a 2 pixel image image enough times, it will eventually look like the Mona Lisa. But does that mean it actually is the Mona Lisa?
See here:
It's like a mean average in PS!