Home Open Account Help 243 users online

Railfan Technology > Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly


Date: 05/28/23 14:58
Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly
Author: ssloansjca

I have been experimenting with the new AI (Artificial Intelligence) enabled version of Adobe Photoshop Beta.

It easily and quickly rids photos of ugly blemishes like you see in the first of these two pictures. It probably took less effort to remove these ugly blemishes than it did to create them!

I hope you like this post:

Steve Sloan
San José, CA

--

My train Website: http://www.ssloan.net/trains/
My train feed on Mastodon: https://sfba.social/@steve_sloan
My Instagram train feed: https://www.instagram.com/ssloansjca/
My train photography page on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/stevesloantrains


Please do not edit, crop, "correct" or "improve" my photos without asking me first.

Questions about my sources and the information presented here? Please check this out:

http://www.ssloan.net/trains/sources

 






Date: 05/28/23 16:23
Re: Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly
Author: TomG

......Reportedly.....



Date: 05/28/23 19:44
Re: Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly
Author: ssloansjca

Tom:

I can verify from my own experiences that it works. I tried it myself. If I had heard someone say it worked but I could not verify myself that it works, then I would say "reportedly." The word reportedly is an adverb that means, "according to what some people say."

When it comes to locomotive data. Sometimes sources conflict. I may try to guess which information is most accurate. Sometimes I guess wrong. I am not going to vet or evaluate sources in depth. I cannot personally verify the builders location, date and serial number of the equipment I photograph.I was not there when the locomotive was built. I do not have proof of my own. I don't know for sure, and I am not trying to be authoritative; so, I use reportedly. I am just trying to give perspective to the photos, not be a source. When I use reportedly I am trying to tell readers my information is not checked for accuracy and I have no intention of doing deep research.
Steve



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/23 19:50 by ssloansjca.



Date: 05/28/23 21:03
Re: Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly
Author: ssloansjca

Puffy clouds and dragons can also be added...

Steve




Date: 05/28/23 21:33
Re: Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly
Author: Evan_Werkema

ssloansjca Wrote:

> Puffy clouds and dragons can also be added...

Careful, you'll set off the dragon equipment detector...



Date: 05/28/23 21:58
Re: Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly
Author: TomG

ssloansjca Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tom:
>
> I can verify from my own experiences that it
> works. I tried it myself. If I had heard someone
> say it worked but I could not verify myself that
> it works, then I would say "reportedly." The word
> reportedly is an adverb that means, "according to
> what some people say."
>
> When it comes to locomotive data. Sometimes
> sources conflict. I may try to guess which
> information is most accurate. Sometimes I guess
> wrong. I am not going to vet or evaluate sources
> in depth. I cannot personally verify the builders
> location, date and serial number of the equipment
> I photograph.I was not there when the locomotive
> was built. I do not have proof of my own. I don't
> know for sure, and I am not trying to be
> authoritative; so, I use reportedly. I am just
> trying to give perspective to the photos, not be a
> source. When I use reportedly I am trying to tell
> readers my information is not checked for accuracy
> and I have no intention of doing deep research.
> Steve

Steve it was just humor. I kinda thought you would have seen that coming. I do like the blemish removal. I wonder what Amtrak thinks of this less than positive display.



Date: 05/29/23 13:07
Re: Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly
Author: bobwilcox

The first shot was taken with a uniform slate-grey sky. The future isn't bright for graphic artists. IMG_3774_Edit_646fc4486ac80.jpg

ssloansjca Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have been experimenting with the new AI
> (Artificial Intelligence) enabled version of Adobe
> Photoshop Beta.
>
> It easily and quickly rids photos of ugly
> blemishes like you see in the first of these two
> pictures. It probably took less effort to remove
> these ugly blemishes than it did to create them!
>
> I hope you like this post:
>
> Steve Sloan
> San José, CA
>
> --
>
> My train Website: http://www.ssloan.net/trains/
> My train feed on Mastodon:
> https://sfba.social/@steve_sloan
> My Instagram train feed:
> https://www.instagram.com/ssloansjca/
> My train photography page on Facebook:
> https://www.facebook.com/stevesloantrains
>
>
> Please do not edit, crop, "correct" or "improve"
> my photos without asking me first.
>
> Questions about my sources and the information
> presented here? Please check this out:
>
> http://www.ssloan.net/trains/sources
>
>  

Bob Wilcox
Charlottesville, VA
My Flickr Shots



Date: 06/03/23 17:36
Re: Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly
Author: march_hare

Dragons aren't properly weathered. 



Date: 06/03/23 23:56
Re: Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly
Author: sf1010

Can it remove the ugly blemishes on the blue paint on the nose?



Date: 07/23/23 20:16
Re: Remove Ugly Blemishes With Firefly
Author: Mgoldman

Evan_Werkema Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ssloansjca Wrote:
>
> > Puffy clouds and dragons can also be added...
>
> Careful, you'll set off the dragon equipment
> detector...

Lol!

As for the AI tool - the blemish could have easily
been removed using the clone tool, patch tool,
or more recently, content aware.

What was AI here?  What exactly did you do
that one might find "AI" impressive?

I have sone shots of a Pennsy F7 with the nose
door open from the Stoursburg Line - I've wondered
but doubted that AI was good enough to close it.

/Mitch



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0782 seconds