USM | Strolls with my Dog

Deconvolution by the Richardson-Lucy algorithm is achieved by minimizing the convex loss function derived in the last article

(1) $\begin{equation*} J(O) = \sum \bigg (O**PSF - I\cdot ln(O**PSF) \bigg) \end{equation*}$

with

$J$ , the scalar quantity to minimize, function of ideal image $O(x,y)$
$I(x,y)$ , linear captured image intensity laid out in $M$ rows and $N$ columns, corrupted by Poisson noise and blurring by the $PSF$
$PSF(x,y)$ , the known two-dimensional Point Spread Function that should be deconvolved out of $I$
$O(x,y)$ , the output image resulting from deconvolution, ideally without shot noise and blurring introduced by the $PSF$
** two-dimensional convolution
$\cdot$ element-wise product
$ln$ , element-wise natural logarithm

In what follows indices $x$ and $y$ , from zero to $M$ -1 and $N$ -1 respectively, are dropped for readability. Articles about algorithms are by definition dry so continue at your own peril.

So, given captured raw image $I$ blurred by known function $PSF$ , how do we find the minimum value of $J$ yielding the deconvolved image $O$ that we are after?

Continue reading The Richardson-Lucy Algorithm →

In the last few posts I have made the case that Image Quality in a digital camera is entirely dependent on the light Information collected at a sensor’s photosites during Exposure. Any subsequent processing – whether analog amplification and conversion to digital in-camera and/or further processing in-computer – effectively applies a set of Information Transfer Functions to the signal that when multiplied together result in the data from which the final photograph is produced. Each step of the way can at best maintain the original Information Quality (IQ) but in most cases it will degrade it somewhat.

IQ: Only as Good as at Photosites’ Output

This point is key: in a well designed imaging system** the final image IQ is only as good as the scene information collected at the sensor’s photosites, independently of how this information is stored in the working data along the processing chain, on its way to being transformed into a pleasing photograph. As long as scene information is properly encoded by the system early on, before being written to the raw file – and information transfer is maintained in the data throughout the imaging and processing chain – final photograph IQ will be virtually the same independently of how its data’s histogram looks along the way.

Continue reading Image Quality: Raising ISO vs Pushing in Conversion →

Musings about Photography