When a photo is overexposed you can never make it perfect. When a photo is blurry you can never make it perfect.
When a photo has been taken with a flash you can never make it perfect, the shadows at the back are too much. A photo that is taken where light and shade are coming together does not look perfect, you can never make it perfect, whatever SoftOrbits may claim.
Why do you think photographers take several photos of a subject. They keep the good photos, the failed into the garbage bowl.

Sara Findley  –  Last year  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+16)

Перевести

Sara Findley, FWIW, the amount of data captured is key. A photo that's over/under exposed is not a problem *If* there's enough highlight & shadow detail. If the scene has too great a dynamic range for a camera -- I *think* what you mean by light & shade -- bracket the photo & use HDR or blend in an image editor. Results using artificial lighting depend on the lighting. Even a roughly $30 [on sale] bounce flash, especially one that works with the camera's auto settings, can work just fine -- often as well as, if not better than natural light. And nowadays there's even hope for out of focus/blurry photos using AI software. Many [most?] pros feel there is nothing close to a perfect photo *until* it's been through an image editor. RE: Easy Photo Unblur, it might help, or not, depending on the photo.

Sara Findley, FWIW, the amount of data captured is key. A photo that's over/under exposed is not a problem *If* there's enough highlight & shadow detail. If the scene has too great a dynamic range for a camera -- I *think* what you mean by light & shade -- bracket the photo & use HDR or blend in an image editor. Results using artificial lighting depend on the lighting. Even a roughly $30 [on sale] bounce flash, especially one that works with the camera's auto settings, can work just fine -- often as well as, if not better than natural light. And nowadays there's even hope for out of focus/blurry photos using AI software. Many [most?] pros feel there is nothing close to a perfect photo *until* it's been through an image editor. RE: Easy Photo Unblur, it might help, or not, depending on the photo.
Save | Cancel

mike  –  Last year  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+11)

Перевести

There is so much talk about making photos perfect. I have used this program for a few years and have never expected perfection. I have used it to attempt to improve some of my very worst photos and have to say that in many cases there has been no improvement whatsoever. However, by fiddling with the settings I have managed to transform some really poor photos into just about acceptable ones even though they would be deemed far from perfect.

I feel that even a small improvement is better than keeping some of the really bad originals and for that reason alone I have stuck with this. My photo collection is marginally better after using the program than it was before and that is enough for me. Clearly this is insufficient for those of you who want total perfection and I can see that this program is not for you.

Niv  –  Last year  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+16)

Перевести

Thanks for a chance to check out the program.
It's a bit too slow at 45 to 60 sec per change on an Alienware M17 R3 (GPU 2070S)
Would also be great if user interface offered some guidance on expected result of a slider move.
I don't understand the preset choices light, soft, gentle, etc.
"Gentle" preset initially made the image a LOT worse in pretty much every way.
After playing with it for a while, I don't see a result that couldn't be achieved in adobe camera raw in less time.
For users without access to editing programs this could be a better than nothing choice.
But too slow for most others.

BobbyA  –  Last year  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+8)

Перевести