Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ft Pattern Suppressor

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ron Chambers
    replied
    Position of the pattern in each image dictates that you do the suppression separately. Are you doing lense corrections etc? What about having the camera plane parallel to the fabric? The slightest tilt or twist in either the camera or the fabric changes what the transform sees. Even though what is being applied is an amplitude effect, the computation of the transform has to have equivalent phase or positioning. What does "regional imbalance" look like? You may be suppressing information too near to the zero frequency position in the transform. I'd recommend that you save off the the transform before picking and after picking for the individual images and view them closely and side by side.

    Do you really believe that the fabric is stretched the same over the entire thing? It is probably different within each image. You may need to only use the sweet spot of the lense which means you have to take more shots. How consistent is the lighting across the image? Any shadows due to the building structure or lighting? Is there curvature in the wall? Temperature and or humidity changes will change the stretch of the fabric.

    I've set up shooting of fine art and the problems are never ending and due to the nature of the art you have no control.

    Do you have pixel shift available in the camera? It or something equivalent is needed because of artifacts from the suppression of the Bayer pattern add low and high spatial frequency noise. Remember here that you are pixel peeping with the whole experiment. You have to handle all of the little things that are ignored in most photography.

    RONC
    Last edited by Ron Chambers; Today, 05:57 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chain
    replied
    I see! And you are trying to get rid of the silk fabric pattern. Quite insanely large images.

    I have to agree with Ron here that it will most likely be best to run the suppression before combining the images (due to the pattern as well as the image size).

    If you are somehow getting "regional imbalance" from one image to the next so they don't match, it would be possible to reuse the suppression layer from one image on another if you want to perform the exact same suppression (but this probably only makes sense if the pattern to be suppressed turns out identical in both after the fourier transform). You could also consider copying/reusing only the mask (perhaps a better idea).

    Leave a comment:


  • Ron Chambers
    replied
    I would suggest that you always filter before combining. When you combine first the "noise" must be consistent which it most likely won't be. If the noise is not periodic from panel to panel you get a poorer suppression. Keep in mind that the Fourier Transform is global in nature but each of your shots are independent. Size isn't as much a problem with the individual images. You should overlap the camera shots also.

    RONC

    Leave a comment:


  • Maple
    replied
    ​​Meticulous painting,Water-based ink on silk ,in Chinese -->(绢本水彩工笔)

    in the past, my workflow was exactly the same with you suggested(@Chain @Ron Chambers):

    Capture with a camera, filtered separately,then combine ,

    Just worried about regional imbalance

    PS: Affinity Photo -> denoise -> fft denoise, can do the process,but cannot save back to PSB

    ---------
    ​​
    2020-09-19_21-04-06.png

    2020-09-19_21-04-31.png

    2020-09-19_21-07-59.png

    [processed screenshot]

    Anyway, thank you again for your great job !

    If you have the opportunity to come to China, look forward to meeting in Beijing. ^_^

    Leave a comment:


  • Ron Chambers
    replied
    Chain and Maple,

    Internal working of the Fourier routines is floating point or 32 bits/color/pixel. Also the code is limited to 32767 px on the longest side - worked on increasing to 300000px but Adobe wouldn't share documents about what to do so stopped trying. The Pattern Suppression also pads the image by either 10% or 100px on each side (Chain which is right? My memory is not very good anymore.) .

    I'd suggest windowing the file with a large overlap. You have 27000x54000 px image, Add a 25% inner overlap of the windows. I'd set windows at x 0 to 27000/2+3400 and 27000/2-3400 to 27000 and y do likewise but maybe do 3 windows so the windows aren't too large. Run the suppression on the 4 or 6 windows and then piece them together with PS.

    The 300dpi doesn't enter into this. You should gauge that by the viewing distance.

    Let me know if you need more help.
    RONC

    Leave a comment:


  • Chain
    replied
    230*450 cm @ 300 PPI equals 27165*53150 px. At 16 bits/channel this is just over 8 GB of image data for a simple flat RGB image.
    If something is to be printed the size of a wall (four and a half meters high?!), you typically don't need anything nearly as high as 300 PPI. 300 PPI is typically what we aim for with prints where the viewer will have their nose real close to the paper studying the images. When scanning/photographing an original with a repeating texture in the material, I can't imagine what original you have that is 230*450 cm? Archival photos of really large artworks? ...but then you'd want to preserve the structure? If it's not a scan, but created from scratch on the computer, then you can typically avoid adding a repeating pattern in the first place so you would not need the Pattern Suppressor.If a mosaic of multiple images, you'd run the filter on the individual tiles before combining.

    What are you working on? I'm curious as I can't think of anything that makes sense.

    256 GB of memory should be enough for a lot of heavy lifting, and it's possible it's not actually running full.
    Hopefully Ron Chambers can chime on how much memory the filters theoretically require when transforming an image, and generally what happens with extreme sizes or when memory runs full.

    ---

    I did some tests (CC2020, Windows, 16 GB of RAM, 16-bit image, Ft2DH filter):

    At exactly 18919x18919 px and above I get the "not enough memory" error. I also encountered Ps instantly crashing sometimes at more extreme sizes.
    At exactly 32768x32768 px and above I stop getting any error message, and the filter simply doesn't run. This might be the current max limit?

    Would be nice if someone could check on a different system.

    Leave a comment:


  • Maple
    replied
    Thank you for your hard work
    The problem I encountered was a large file with insufficient memory

    For example, in Photoshop, if you create a new file, 120 * 160cm, 300dpi, 16bit RGB, you will be prompted that there is not enough memory

    However, 120 * 150cm, 300dpi, 16bit RGB can be handled normally

    Usually, the file size I need to process is 230 * 450cm, 300dpi, 16bit RGB

    Try version 2.5 code on GitHub,Visual Studio 2019, x64 bit recompiling, same fails

    If you have time, please help me out from this limitation. Thank you again

    ---------------

    PS: my computer memory is 256g


    Adobe Photoshop version: 22.0.0 20200818.m.1012 2020 / 08 / 18: f82f433761 x64
    Number of starts: 89
    Operating system: Windows 10 64 bit
    Version: 10 or higher version 10.0.17763.475
    System structure: Intel CPU family: 6, model: 15, level: 2, with MMX extension instruction set, SSE integer, SSE floating point, SSE2, sse3, sse4.1, sse4.2, AVX, avx2, hyper threading
    Number of physical processors: 24
    Number of logical processors: 48
    Processor speed: 2494 MHz

    Built in memory: 262066 MB
    Free memory: 240197 MB
    Available memory for Photoshop: 240197 MB
    Memory occupied by Photoshop: 100%

    Leave a comment:


  • Ferasmgani
    replied
    To be honest, this is magic, thank you very much

    Leave a comment:


  • Chain
    replied
    This is because your OS has some strict rules for running software unless it's from known publishers or via Apple's own closed app store. You will get the same warning for lots of apps you download... It became even stricter in Sierra and they even removed the GUI option to allow running whatever software you want! We are individuals doing this in our spare time, and no way we are going to figure out how many hoops we'd have to jump through to be "verfied" in Apple's eyes. I don't even have a Mac to test on.


    Anyway, this is easy enough to bypass. Read everything you need here (or just google it):
    http://macworld.co.uk/how-to/mac-sof...loper-3669596/

    You should then be able to use those plugin-files.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jevo
    replied
    Schermafbeelding 2020-02-27 om 13.59.34.png
    Dear Chain,Schermafbeelding 2020-02-27 om 13.59.52.png

    Today I downloaded the Pattern Suppressor v2.6 program according to the requirements in the description.
    The moment I use the program on a screened photo I get the message that the filters are not available. I have enclosed the screenshots below, including the translation.
    Screenshot 2 came up 3 times when I pressed on anulate.
    I use Photoshop cc 2020 on a Mac Pro with OS Catalina.
    What could have gone wrong and how can I fix it?
    Thanks in advance
    Sincerely,
    Jan

    Ft2DS.plugin cannot be opened because the developer cannot be verified.

    macOs cannot verify that this app contains malware.

    Safari downloaded this file today at 10:45 AM from www.dropbox.com
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • Chain
    replied
    Dale Murphy wrote a brief paper for his photography club regarding the Pattern Suppressor.

    It can be found in the attached link.

    Leave a comment:


  • UK66
    replied
    Originally posted by Chain View Post
    No. It is for regular Photoshop only.

    A trial can be downloaded from Adobe if you want to try it.
    Thanks, Chain, much appreciated, Pete.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chain
    replied
    No. It is for regular Photoshop only.

    A trial can be downloaded from Adobe if you want to try it.

    Leave a comment:


  • UK66
    replied
    Hi, will the plugin work with Photoshop Elements?

    thanks,

    Pete.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chain
    replied
    I did some troubleshooting and found that the file permissions needed to be set to allow me to read and write. Once I done that all worked perfectly.
    For the plugin-files I presume? Unfortunately I no longer have a Mac to test on. If someone else here on Mac could test the plugins and verify this that would be great!

    ---

    Ps: Windows-plugins have been updated. They are now a bit faster due to multi-threading.

    Leave a comment:

Related Topics

Collapse

  • visnew
    Virus / Spyware in plugins or actions
    by visnew
    Hi:

    I'm not sure if I'm posting in the right place, but since the previous "Virus" thread was posted here, I thought it was best not to change.

    In the original thread, Gary warned us not to download stuff from unknown or dangerous sites. However, I'm wondering...
    05-15-2008, 02:42 PM
  • Rydiant
    Is it worthwhile to sell actions?
    by Rydiant
    I've developed a series of actions that produce effects like some commercial plugins. Because the quality of output compares well (and in some ways surpasses what's already out there,) I think users would be willing to pay for the actions at a fraction of the cost of a plugin alternative.
    ...
    04-18-2010, 05:24 PM
  • GaryGornelli
    Actions
    by GaryGornelli
    Hi, I was discussing brushing up work to show clients the results at shoots and was told that some photographers run a few actions. Curves, smoothing/sharpening etc. Do any of you? What are they?

    Gary
    07-16-2009, 11:28 AM
  • Sanda
    strange behavior
    by Sanda
    After a recent hard drive crash and replacement I had to reinstall Photoshop 6. I've reinstalled all of my plugins and actions ect. All seemed to be working fine but today I needed to use an action for the first time since the reinstall and to my amazement discovered that my actions pallet won't...
    09-18-2002, 03:26 PM
  • Doug Nelson
    Creating Actions in Photoshop
    by Doug Nelson
    View here
    01-11-2003, 07:34 PM
Working...
X