Focus Fixer Fixed |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How
many pictures have you binned or deleted because your focusing was
not spot on? FixerLabs launched a Photoshop plug-in called FocusFixer 1.0, which we weren't over enthusiastic about. Fast on the heels of version 1.0, FixerLabs has upgraded the product to version 1.1. The new version has; improved controls, is faster, has improved memory handling and claims to give better results than Unsharp Masking. I am impressed at how quickly FixerLabs has responded to address and fix the problems in their first version. So how does version 1.1 perform? The plug-in works with Photoshop 6 & 7 and is available for both Mac (OS X) and Windows. FocusFixer promises to fix blurred pictures “that are beyond the reach of other sharpening techniques such as un-sharp masking” in other applications. FixerLabs also claims to give "clearer and sharper images than unsharp masking". A tall claim or a sharper product? Let's put it to the test. Installing FocusFixer is straight forward - the installer finds your plug-ins folder and installs the software automatically. The on-line documentation says you can install the software in multiple applications (on the same computer) - Photoshop 7, Elements 2, etc. FocusFixer claims to be compatible with almost any software that accepts Photoshop plug-ins. I got error messages when I tried to run it from within Paint Shop Pro 8, Corel Photo Paint 11, and Ulead Photo Impact 8, but encountered no problems with Photoshop or Elements.
FocusFixer uses complex, processor intensive, mathematical techniques for fixing blurred pictures, which is another way of saying that even on a fast computer this filter is not fast. Processing a Nikon D1 (7.51mb) file took 50 seconds (compared to 1 minute 20 seconds on version 1.0). A Canon 10D file (18mb) took 2 min 20 sec. to complete (on version 1.0 the filter crashed out). The instructions state that for large images you should select the rectangular Marquee tool in Photoshop and select a smaller area which has a similar focus point. I don’t know why Fixerlabs suggest this method when using the Lasso tool with a small amount of feathering will give a better result. The two sliders may cause some confusion for users, they are quite simple to use - it's just a case of trial and error. Here are some permutations - see how the image changes. I quite like the Deblur 2.0 - Threshold 10
I have tried a variety of images with varying degrees of success, below are some of my samples:
The picture of my daughter, Sophie, (baby in the photo-i printer test chart), has been improved by using 4.0 Deblur and 30 Threshold values. The USM in Photoshop has produced excess contrast in the strands of hair. FocusFixer has made a good job of this picture by keeping many of the subtleties. The church photograph below was taken using highest quality JPEG on a Canon EOS 1Ds. The picture is not an out of focus picture, but lacks bite. This test is looking at how well Focus Fixer can restore some of the detail.
FocusFixer has made a good job of sharpening up the image, whereas the USM filter seems to have lost more detail than it has recovered. The Sharpen More filter has produced the best result here. Don't be fooled into thinking the Sharpen More & USM are giving the best result even if it does look the sharpest. There are far too many artifacts in this version. On the FocusFixer rendition I used the Marquee tool as per recommendation, you can just see the soft edge on the entire frame. Use the freehand marquee to select similar areas.
The boats picture looks quite interesting, notice how FocusFixer has brought out the detail in the water and in the distant pylons. I avoided using too much USM on the other shot as this started to produce white haloes around the dark areas. Although FocusFixer has restored a lot of detail, it has also introduced some noise into the sky, this can be tweaked by increasing the Threshold amount but at the price of losing some detail. The sliders are a fine balancing act - one trades off against the other, but somewhere you will find the perfect combination.
The
on-line instructions state that high quality TIFF or RAW files
work best and that JPEG compression
should be avoided. I found this to be rather
odd as most out of focus pictures are going to be produced by compact
style cameras. Users are more likely to be shooting JPEG's
with their cameras.
Professional photographers who are using TIFF or RAW
are more likely to bin an image
that doesn't
meet their quality criteria. The pictures used in this review
are all JPEGs. Verdict. The filter works as claimed but requires care in applying it. Using too much will give you a horrendous looking picture. There are optimum settings for any image - finding these takes time. I like the faster previews and rendering time and the extra user control. This latest version is a vast improvement on the previous version and I have no hesitation in recommending this software.
Demo and full product available via download from FixerLabs © Vincent
Oliver 2003 www.photo-i.co.uk |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||