Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Image Deblurring using Inertial Measurement Sensors
5 views
Skip to first unread message
Skybuck Flying
Nov 8, 2012, 2:37:55 AM11/8/12
to
Hello,
The last few days I was wondering if something like this was possible. It
seems Microsoft has already researched these kinds of ideas.
Now I am wondering if these kinds of algorithms and hardware is already
implemented in todays digital cameras ? Any ideas ?
(I know my soon to arrive canon powershot sx50 has some sort of "image
stablization" but perhaps that uses different techniques...)
News article:
Microsoft Anti-Blur Algorithm Saves Photos From Your Shaky Hands
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/08/microsoft-anti-blur-algorithm-saves-photos-from-your-shaky-hands/
Microsoft Article:
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/ivm/imudeblurring/
"
We present a deblurring algorithm that uses a hardware attachment coupled
with a natural image prior to deblur images from consumer cameras. Our
approach uses a combination of inexpensive gyroscopes and accelerometers in
an energy optimization framework to estimate a blur function from the camera’s
acceleration and angular velocity during an exposure. We solve for the
camera motion at a high sampling rate during an exposure and infer the
latent image using a joint optimization. Our method is completely automatic,
handles per-pixel, spatially-varying blur, and out-performs the current
leading image-based methods. Our experiments show that it handles large
kernels – up to at least 100 pixels, with a typical size of 30 pixels. We
also present a method to perform “ground-truth” measurements of camera
motion blur. We use this method to validate our hardware and deconvolution
approach. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that uses 6
DOF inertial sensors for dense, per-pixel spatially-varying image deblurring
and the first work to gather dense ground-truth measurements for
camera-shake blur.
"
Bye,
Skybuck.
The last few days I was wondering if something like this was possible. It
seems Microsoft has already researched these kinds of ideas.
Now I am wondering if these kinds of algorithms and hardware is already
implemented in todays digital cameras ? Any ideas ?
(I know my soon to arrive canon powershot sx50 has some sort of "image
stablization" but perhaps that uses different techniques...)
News article:
Microsoft Anti-Blur Algorithm Saves Photos From Your Shaky Hands
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/08/microsoft-anti-blur-algorithm-saves-photos-from-your-shaky-hands/
Microsoft Article:
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/ivm/imudeblurring/
"
We present a deblurring algorithm that uses a hardware attachment coupled
with a natural image prior to deblur images from consumer cameras. Our
approach uses a combination of inexpensive gyroscopes and accelerometers in
an energy optimization framework to estimate a blur function from the camera’s
acceleration and angular velocity during an exposure. We solve for the
camera motion at a high sampling rate during an exposure and infer the
latent image using a joint optimization. Our method is completely automatic,
handles per-pixel, spatially-varying blur, and out-performs the current
leading image-based methods. Our experiments show that it handles large
kernels – up to at least 100 pixels, with a typical size of 30 pixels. We
also present a method to perform “ground-truth” measurements of camera
motion blur. We use this method to validate our hardware and deconvolution
approach. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that uses 6
DOF inertial sensors for dense, per-pixel spatially-varying image deblurring
and the first work to gather dense ground-truth measurements for
camera-shake blur.
"
Bye,
Skybuck.
Whiskers
Nov 8, 2012, 2:20:13 PM11/8/12
to
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.photography.]
As far as I know, current anti-shake methods rely on moving the image
detector, or some part of the lens, or both. They do of course use
'inertial detectors' of some sort.
MS seem to be using the output from their inertial detectors to control a
software approach instead. That avoids some moving parts, but probably
uses quite a lot of electronic processing instead, so may not be practical
with current electronics and batteries.
I still like a good tripod, or at least something solid to lean on.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
On 2012-11-08, Skybuck Flying <Window...@DreamPC2006.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The last few days I was wondering if something like this was possible. It
> seems Microsoft has already researched these kinds of ideas.
>
> Now I am wondering if these kinds of algorithms and hardware is already
> implemented in todays digital cameras ? Any ideas ?
>
> (I know my soon to arrive canon powershot sx50 has some sort of "image
> stablization" but perhaps that uses different techniques...)
>
> News article:
[...]
> Hello,
>
> The last few days I was wondering if something like this was possible. It
> seems Microsoft has already researched these kinds of ideas.
>
> Now I am wondering if these kinds of algorithms and hardware is already
> implemented in todays digital cameras ? Any ideas ?
>
> (I know my soon to arrive canon powershot sx50 has some sort of "image
> stablization" but perhaps that uses different techniques...)
>
> News article:
As far as I know, current anti-shake methods rely on moving the image
detector, or some part of the lens, or both. They do of course use
'inertial detectors' of some sort.
MS seem to be using the output from their inertial detectors to control a
software approach instead. That avoids some moving parts, but probably
uses quite a lot of electronic processing instead, so may not be practical
with current electronics and batteries.
I still like a good tripod, or at least something solid to lean on.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
PeterN
Nov 8, 2012, 7:38:25 PM11/8/12
to
On 11/8/2012 2:37 AM, Skybuck Flying wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The last few days I was wondering if something like this was possible.
> It seems Microsoft has already researched these kinds of ideas.
>
> Now I am wondering if these kinds of algorithms and hardware is already
> implemented in todays digital cameras ? Any ideas ?
>
> (I know my soon to arrive canon powershot sx50 has some sort of "image
> stablization" but perhaps that uses different techniques...)
>
> News article:
>
> Microsoft Anti-Blur Algorithm Saves Photos From Your Shaky Hands
>
> http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/08/microsoft-anti-blur-algorithm-saves-photos-from-your-shaky-hands/
>
>
> Microsoft Article:
>
> http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/ivm/imudeblurring/
>
> "
> We present a deblurring algorithm that uses a hardware attachment
> coupled with a natural image prior to deblur images from consumer
> cameras. Our approach uses a combination of inexpensive gyroscopes and
> accelerometers in an energy optimization framework to estimate a blur
> function from the camera’s acceleration and angular velocity during an
> Hello,
>
> The last few days I was wondering if something like this was possible.
> It seems Microsoft has already researched these kinds of ideas.
>
> Now I am wondering if these kinds of algorithms and hardware is already
> implemented in todays digital cameras ? Any ideas ?
>
> (I know my soon to arrive canon powershot sx50 has some sort of "image
> stablization" but perhaps that uses different techniques...)
>
> News article:
>
> Microsoft Anti-Blur Algorithm Saves Photos From Your Shaky Hands
>
> http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/08/microsoft-anti-blur-algorithm-saves-photos-from-your-shaky-hands/
>
>
> Microsoft Article:
>
> http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/ivm/imudeblurring/
>
> "
> We present a deblurring algorithm that uses a hardware attachment
> coupled with a natural image prior to deblur images from consumer
> cameras. Our approach uses a combination of inexpensive gyroscopes and
> accelerometers in an energy optimization framework to estimate a blur
> exposure. We solve for the camera motion at a high sampling rate during
> an exposure and infer the latent image using a joint optimization. Our
> method is completely automatic, handles per-pixel, spatially-varying
> blur, and out-performs the current leading image-based methods. Our
> experiments show that it handles large kernels – up to at least 100
> an exposure and infer the latent image using a joint optimization. Our
> method is completely automatic, handles per-pixel, spatially-varying
> blur, and out-performs the current leading image-based methods. Our
> pixels, with a typical size of 30 pixels. We also present a method to
> perform “ground-truth†measurements of camera motion blur. We use
> this method to validate our hardware and deconvolution approach. To the
> best of our knowledge, this is the first work that uses 6 DOF inertial
> sensors for dense, per-pixel spatially-varying image deblurring and the
> first work to gather dense ground-truth measurements for camera-shake blur.
> "
>
> Bye,
> Skybuck.
according to the article, they use six sensors per pixel. Sounds like a
> best of our knowledge, this is the first work that uses 6 DOF inertial
> sensors for dense, per-pixel spatially-varying image deblurring and the
> first work to gather dense ground-truth measurements for camera-shake blur.
> "
>
> Bye,
> Skybuck.
lot of sensors.
--
Peter
Skybuck Flying
Nov 11, 2012, 7:09:09 AM11/11/12
to
"PeterN" wrote in message
news:509c5084$0$15606$8f2e...@news.shared-secrets.com...
instead of something else like just certain areas or so.
I think the 6 sensors are ment to read/detect the x,y,z movement of the
camera, and also the roll of each axis.
The "kernel" which is mentioned probably indicates it's some kind of
parallel algorithm which processes 30 to 100 pixels per launch or block or
something, that part isn't entirely clear to me but I am guessing it's ment
for a parallel chip, perhaps a nvidia/cuda-capable chip. Maybe a 30 to 100
cuda cores chip or so.
Bye,
Skybuck.
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Nov 11, 2012, 6:46:10 PM11/11/12
to
Skybuck Flying <Window...@DreamPC2006.com> wrote:
> The "kernel" which is mentioned probably indicates it's some kind of
> parallel algorithm which processes 30 to 100 pixels per launch or block or
> something, that part isn't entirely clear to me but I am guessing it's ment
> for a parallel chip, perhaps a nvidia/cuda-capable chip. Maybe a 30 to 100
> cuda cores chip or so.
Wrong.
> The "kernel" which is mentioned probably indicates it's some kind of
> parallel algorithm which processes 30 to 100 pixels per launch or block or
> something, that part isn't entirely clear to me but I am guessing it's ment
> for a parallel chip, perhaps a nvidia/cuda-capable chip. Maybe a 30 to 100
> cuda cores chip or so.
It's a convolution kernel containing 30 to 100 pixels.
Maybe that makes it clearer for you:
http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/HIPR2/convolve.htm
The operation can, but doesn't need to be parallelized.
-Wolfgang
0 new messages