Jump to content

Pgf Frames Sharpened With Blurity Software


Recommended Posts

SweatyYeti

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.

 

 

That's a good idea, JC. Here is the Morris Suit image sharpened...(with the default settings)...

 

 

MorrisSuit-BluritySharpen-AG1_zpswridjjt

 

 

One thing the sharpening does, is help make the wrinkles/folds stand out more clearly. 

 

 

Here it is side-by-side with the sharpened F352 image...

 

Frame-352D_deblurred2-BobMorrisSuit_Debl

 

 

 

One interesting thing I notice...(not related to sharpening)...is a significant difference in one of the 'body proportions'. Bob's torso...(from the bottom of the baggy butt, to the top of the head)...is about the same length as Patty's....yet his upper-leg appears significantly shorter.

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice enhancements, I'm seeing a "worried/concerned" expression pop out. One thing giving me reservations about this particular enhancement software or process though, is that the texture of leaves in background is sameish as some patches of fur now. 

 

 

Now we just need to place this guy at Bluff Creek in '68 and the suit case is closed... 

 

muuugshot2b-thumb-400x519.jpg

 

(If the mask/head doesn't fit, you must aquit...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blurity is a high-pass digital filter that uses edge detection in an attempt to refocus an image. You can get the same effect by playing with a combination of Sharpening, Edge Enhancing and Softening filters. The problem is that digital filters tamper with the structure of the image as apposed to the color Brightness and Contrast filters. And if you tamper with the image then anything goes.

post-337-0-67287300-1424545341.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

^good one, Gigantofootecus.  

 

In the de-blurred comparison to the cow camp debacle above, I almost cannot tell the difference between the two!  </ 8 )  jj  

What about doing a frame-by-frame Blurity version of the entire stabilized film?  8 )  Very cool! 

Edited by xspider1
Link to post
Share on other sites
JustCurious

I understand what you're saying Gigantofootecus, but there are still things we can see in this side-by-side.  At first glance, these two might seem to be in the same pose, but I think this clearly shows a difference in the gait at this point.  Bob is turning his whole body more toward the camera and taking an exaggerated step.  If you look closely, Bob's head is turned slightly more toward the camera.

 

Note his left arm is parallel to the ground while the right arm is perpendicular.  That is how we are normally aligned when turning that way and also while taking exaggerated steps (i.e., it's how we keep our balance).  Notice that Patty's left arm in slanted downward and the right arm is parallel to the ground.  That is how we normally hold our arm when casually walking and letting our arms swing. 

 

Looking at the contour of Bob's thigh to knee vs. Patty's thigh to knee, you can see that Bob's leg is more bent. 

 

So, in short, we see Patty taking a casual stroll, while Bob is straining for a long stride. 

 

And I still say the breast anatomy says a lot as per my previous post.

 

On camera and in a quick glance, I'm sure it looks convincing enough to fool the general public and that's all they were attempting to accomplish. 

 

As to the suit business, I think someone ought to file a false advertising claim against Morris.  But think of all the free publicity he'd get out of it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what you're saying Gigantofootecus, but there are still things we can see in this side-by-side.  At first glance, these two might seem to be in the same pose, but I think this clearly shows a difference in the gait at this point.  Bob is turning his whole body more toward the camera and taking an exaggerated step.  If you look closely, Bob's head is turned slightly more toward the camera.

 

Note his left arm is parallel to the ground while the right arm is perpendicular.  That is how we are normally aligned when turning that way and also while taking exaggerated steps (i.e., it's how we keep our balance).  Notice that Patty's left arm in slanted downward and the right arm is parallel to the ground.  That is how we normally hold our arm when casually walking and letting our arms swing. 

 

Looking at the contour of Bob's thigh to knee vs. Patty's thigh to knee, you can see that Bob's leg is more bent. 

 

So, in short, we see Patty taking a casual stroll, while Bob is straining for a long stride. 

 

And I still say the breast anatomy says a lot as per my previous post.

 

On camera and in a quick glance, I'm sure it looks convincing enough to fool the general public and that's all they were attempting to accomplish. 

 

As to the suit business, I think someone ought to file a false advertising claim against Morris.  But think of all the free publicity he'd get out of it...

 

JC, I agree 100%. It is clear that Bob H was not Patty. Simple physics, he just doesn't fit in the suit. EOS.

 

As far as image enhancement goes, I always run my pictures thru a high pass filter (sharpen) whether they need it or not. What this does is enhance the edges to remove any blur. It's all legit but it doesn't actually give you any new information. IMO, Blurity is among the best high pass filters so far, but at the end of the day, it is extrapolating lost information. It is an excellent algorithm and should be applied to all the images, but as for all image enhancement filters, it can't prove anything.

Edited by Gigantofootecus
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am reminded of the man who claimed to have murdered JonBenet Ramsey. They later used DNA to prove he didn't do it.

 

Then there are some stories of men who claimed to be the person who raped someone, but they were later acquitted after it was proven that they were not the source of the semen.

 

Some people do stupid things just so they can get involved in something, as if they are searching for some meaning in life. They were never part of the event in question. This seems to be what Bob H. has done with bigfoot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
HOLDMYBEER

Which case is a testament to never basing an investigative decision on the mere statement of any individual whose reliability has not been established. A witness statement, no matter how grandiose or subdued, must be corroborated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

In the Blurity-sharpened F352 image...(at the top of the previous page)....one detail that appears more sharply-defined is the dark shading between the lips.

 

To test whether that is a false 'created' detail, due to the processing, or a legitimate detail....I overlaid that image with the very high quality F350 image that MK Davis has used....(I rotated the images 12 Degs CCW, to make Patty's head vertical)...

 

F350-F352BlurityAG1_zpsf3ce0idk.gif

 

 

The lip detail...including the dark shading between the lips....appears virtually identical in both images. So, it is a legitimate detail.

 

 

Here are the two images side-by-side...

 

F350-F352Blurity-DetailComp1_zpsc6e9c468

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

^^

 

Yes, on this issue and many others.

 

Backdoc

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

Thank you very much, HMB...and Backdoc. :) 

 

There are many small details on Patty, still to be analyzed. So, I'll keep 'plugging away'!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
HOLDMYBEER

Sweaty, If you are taking requests for application of your technique, I have had a long interest in the back side of the left leg just as it is put under load. I am not sure what frame that is. It seems to show an anomaly behind the knee. Perhaps artifact, perhaps injury or defect. Are you familiar with the frame?

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