Kevin Lynch

    Newer Older

    Adobe Systems CTO Kevin Lynch during a press Q&A session at Adobe MAX 2010.

    Update [October 19, 2011]: For those of you who have found this photo as result of its use in the recent Adobe MAX Sneak Peek on image deblurring, Adobe Systems' blog has some additional information on this and the other photos seen in the demo. See the "Update" section of the article "Behind All the Buzz: Deblur Sneak Peek.", dom.guillot, and ianxn added this photo to their favorites.

    1. Ray Shan 43 months ago | reply

      It's perfectly sharp to begin with, unlike what's claimed here:

    2. huyzer 43 months ago | reply

      Yah, if they lied.... wow.

    3. Rob Ellis' 43 months ago | reply

      Naughty adobe!
      They'll have just applied a motion blur to the image in photoshop, if the motion blur wasnt done in photoshop, the amount of genuine motion blur would change with things being closer and further away. I look forward to seeing these clever algorithms try fix that! ;)

    4. Junior Henry. 43 months ago | reply

      Ha! What a shame for them

    5. LoWinterSun 43 months ago | reply

      how embarrassing, no doubt adobe will say it was an early April fools so something like that

    6. 43 months ago | reply

      étrange en effet ! pourquoi adobe mentirait ainsi ?! leur nouvel outil semble parfaitement "logique" et fonctionnel.. j'attends la suite de l'histoire impatiemment !

    7. huyzer 43 months ago | reply

      Unbelievable. What were they thinking?! Shame on them.

    8. Pam from Photoshop Team 43 months ago | reply

      For more explanation about the demo files used and our deblur research – see our blog post, which includes a new update at the end - -
      - Pam Clark, Photoshop Team

      P.S. Link is now fixed!

    9. ProDesignTools 43 months ago | reply

      It turns out there's no real issue here... The Adobe researcher just got back to us and posted the background on the images used in the MAX sneak

    10. LoWinterSun 43 months ago | reply

      lol is that the best he could come up with after being busted

    11. Kendall Whitehouse 43 months ago | reply

      It looks like the link doesn't work in Pam Clark's post above . For more information about how this image was used in the Adobe MAX Sneak Peeks, see the Update section at the end of:

    12. Detail Man 43 months ago | reply

      For more explanation about the demo files used and Adobe's intentional blurring of the truth:

    13. PSJ Picdump 43 months ago | reply

      Does this mean that at a major event that was being broadcast, they couldn't actually go out and take a photo with camera shake, instead they had to manipulate a sharp photo?
      If you want to re-create a real-life scenario, then you do that in real life.
      Not everything has to be synthesised.
      If the software is supposed to work, then why didn't they do a genuine demonstration from a real photo? Failing that, why not be honest about the images being used at the time rather than having to make up excuses afterwards.

      I intend to pay for CS6 with money. (When I say money, it will be synthesised, as that seems to be acceptable to Adobe as being real)

    14. alexZCH 43 months ago | reply

      I don't believe their excuses, neither. Cheaters! No wonder Steve didn't like them ;)

    15. Eff Stahp 42 months ago | reply

      Adobe has just released some brand new before-and-after photographs demonstrating this technology fairly conclusively


    16. Detail Man 42 months ago | reply

      In a seemingly crafty (but nevertheless transparent) corporate side-step, Adobe Inc. has evidently decided to try to "deflect the heat" generated by the controversies surrounding their recent posted video featuring public claims made by employee Jue Wang while in the employ of Adobe at:

      and at the Adobe Inc. blog web-page authored by Adobe employee Cari Gushiken, published at:

      ... by instead referring interested parties to a web-site operated and maintained by Jue Wang himself (while he remains in the employ of Adobe Inc, and is acting on Adobe's behalf, anyway).

      Jue Wang's Adobe Employee Profile can be found at:

      Wang's web-site maintained for profit on behalf of Adobe Incorporated is here:

      ... where one will find the publishing of an /entirely different set of images/ represented by Adobe Inc. to be processed by a prototype "de-blur" algorithm. Suddenly, Adobe's story has changed ...

      The resulting images posted are marginal, noisy, not useful, and not representative of results that are /even remotely close/ to what the (alleged by Adobe to be) legitimate "*Plaza.png*" depicts:;

      Despite the fact that the "*sarah-dog.png*" image published by Adobe at:

      ... with the direct link to the image being here:;

      ... shows absolutely no visible signs of there existing /any difference whatsoever/ between what has been claimed by Adobe to be a "before/after" representation of the original Android cell-phone recorded image, a /new and clearly entirely different image/ showing some visible results of some sort of processing, and containing visible image-noise/artifacts (without any explanations or admissions to the obvious differences by Wang himself) is presented here on behalf of Adobe, Inc.:;

      published Oct 23 2011, and appearing to have /actually been processed/ in some manner relative to:;

      In well-managed and ethical companies, the engineering department is not forced by the marketing department to make known to be false public representations regarding the the status and operational efficacy of in-development prototype products. My condolences to Mr. Jue Wang.

      After evidently experiencing pressure by his employer to turn their desire to "sell a sizzle from a yet uncooked steak" to the public, Mr. Wang has been reduced to jeopardizing his personal professional reputation as an evident condition of employment with Adobe, Inc., and (furthermore) evidently been pressured into maintaining a web-site in his personal name that ends up publishing a (much more accurate and realistic) "whimper" following Adobe's "big bang", stating:

      "We agree that the algorithm does not always work well, and this is the case it fails right now."

    17. EvaliaMagic 42 months ago | reply

      They never said this was tech that would even necessarily come out - just something really cool they're trying. People need to relax on the accusations and whatnot. They're being pretty transparent that this isn't a feature they're going to necessarily put in. It depends HEAVILY on the programs ability to measure the camera shake.

      Much of the deblur tech isn't even something unique to adobe mind, there are tonnes of university research projects that are doing much the same sort of research. Photoshop's brings to the table an ability to roughly estimate the blur kernel. You can download from a link off Adobe's blog a program that does in fact produce the results they say it does, but you have to be able to generate the Kernel yourself (they provide some example images) shows some good examples of different algorithms

    18. dave.smith74 42 months ago | reply

      As already stated above Adobe explain themselves plausibly here:
      Not a conspiracy!

    keyboard shortcuts: previous photo next photo L view in light box F favorite < scroll film strip left > scroll film strip right ? show all shortcuts