Jump to content

Pgf Frames Sharpened With Blurity Software


Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
Patterson-Gimlin
BFF Donor

It's not helping that's for sure!

Blurry is good for PGF....KIB keep it blurry guys! :)

Lol. You said what I was thinking. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Mmmmmm, more clear diaper butt. Needs copious amounts of red circles.

 

Once again, Dmaker, you reveal you either haven't done or don't care about researching things before making your pronunciamentos.

 

Search "saggy butted women" on Google Images and you'll find plenty of butts that show the same characteristics you allege prove a "diaper" on Patty.

 

Here's an excellent page (by a certified plastic surgeon) documenting "diaper but" in actual individuals.  I will not link directly to the images for "safe for work" reasons.

 

http://www.exploreplasticsurgery.com/category/buttock-lift/

 

 

Honestly man, you aren't even trying to construct a valid argument...

Edited by Mulder
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not helping that's for sure!

Blurry is good for PGF....KIB keep it blurry guys! :)

 

Accusing SHARPENING software of "blurring" the image it sharpens...logic really isn't your friend, is it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
SweatyYeti

Here is a Blurity-sharpened version of Frame 352... 

 

Frame352D-deblurred2-BS8SI14BMC35DR77_zp

 

It shows the facial detail a little more clearly....like the white area below the right eye, and the dark shading between the lips.

 

 

For comparison...here is the original Cibachrome F352...

 

Frame352D_zps051ccc83.jpg

 

 

 

 

And, here is an animation showing the change in the image...

 

F352-BlurityAG1_zpsbhqhor3j.gif

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeZimmer

Here is a Blurity-sharpened version of Frame 352... 

 

 

 

Dang Sweaty, that sure looks like Bob H. :gaming:

 

Now, we have to figure out to use the false colour process to get an even better look at it, find some undebatable landmarks. I see some in the MK Davis stuff work on false colour for this frame, but don't have the full image in best resolution.

 

I'm still beavering away in the background, but will get to it eventually; working on some spreadsheets to compute some geometrical stuff these days.

 

That frame would be perfect if we just had a foot. But, I think we can get the proportions for femur to tibia from another frame, and voila, we have a foot.

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Dang Sweaty, that sure looks like Bob H. :gaming:

 

 

Now that you mention it, Mike...and, now that I've put on my Heironimus-colored glasses.....I can see the resemblance! Amazing! :thumbsup: 

 

 

 

Now, we have to figure out to use the false colour process to get an even better look at it, find some undebatable landmarks. I see some in the MK Davis stuff work on false colour for this frame, but don't have the full image in best resolution.

 

I'm still beavering away in the background, but will get to it eventually; working on some spreadsheets to compute some geometrical stuff these days.

 

That frame would be perfect if we just had a foot. But, I think we can get the proportions for femur to tibia from another frame, and voila, we have a foot.

 

Regards

 

 

It would be interesting to see what 'false color' could bring out, for additional detail.

 

Maybe it could help define the mouth detail a little bit more distinctly. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
JustCurious

Before anyone gets too hung up on the eye area, I just want to share that I tried out Blurity because I wanted to see if I could clean up a semi-important picture that I have.  The original is a severely motion blurred picture of a person.  When I used Blurity, I ended up with 2 mouths on the person!  So, while Blurity is doing a great job of bringing more clarity to these frames, I would proceed cautiously in using it to over-analyze minute details.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

Sure, JustCurious....Blurity can potentially cause distortion, and/or artifacts in the image. The controls allow for over-processing of images.

 

 

On these PGF images, I have used minimal sharpening, to avoid creating artifacts/false details.

 

In the Frame 352 sharpened image...the 'Blur Size' control was set near it's minimal level....at '8' pixels. The Minimum level is 5 pixels.

 

 

That is also the reason why I provided the animation....so the changes in the image can be seen very clearly, and precisely. 

Edited by SweatyYeti
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
JustCurious

SweatyYeti, could you sharpen the picture of the fake suit in post #41 like you've done with Patty?  I notice what appears to be a seam line in front of the arm where it appears darker.  I want to see if that comes out more.  Then, if you could post that with the picture in post #81, you'd be doing a 'same pose' comparison.

 

What I notice on your enhanced version is how the breast area becomes clearer.  If you compare that to the fake suit, it becomes very clear to me that one represents real anatomy and the other real fakery.

 

On Patty, there is what looks like fatty tissue directly in line with the arm pit behind the breast (the roll).  The top of the breast forms almost a 'shelf' where the skin stretches from the torso to the breast. 

 

Now compare that to the Morris suit.  Here we see two blips out there.  No tissue behind the breast, no natural looking skin stretch.

 

This, for me, is where I see Patty most likely being a real creature, not in a suit.  If you constructed something to achieve this look when the arm is swung back, it would have to be something that expands and contracts, otherwise when the arm came forward the material would stick out.  Think of a curtain on a curtain rod.

 

I hope others can follow what I'm describing.  It's hard to put into words without using the dreaded red circles and arrows.

Edited by JustCurious
Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Airdale wrote:

 

 

Thanks for the work, SY. What caught my eye right off the bat was the detail in the fingers of the right hand.

 

 

Thank you, Airdale. :)

 

 

Regarding the finger detail, that is actually an artifact on the original Cibachrome image.

 

Here is the original Cibachrome image and another high-quality version of F352 overlaid....showing the false finger detail very clearly...

 

CibachromeF352-%20FalseFingerDetailAG1_z

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
×
×
  • Create New...