←back to thread

164 points thunderbong | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.614s | source
Show context
DidYaWipe ◴[] No.41856470[source]
Creepy and misguided. Do people stare at you fixedly and unwaveringly during in-person conversations?

And if they do, do you like it?

replies(2): >>41857212 #>>41858245 #
1. lloeki ◴[] No.41857212[source]
> Look Away: enable_look_away helps create a more natural look by allowing the eyes to look away randomly from the camera when speaking

For the demo video, try enable_look_away = true, look_away_offset_max = 10, look_away_interval_min = 1 and look_away_interval_range = 1 (then submit), which from the result I got should really be the default for a more natural result.

replies(2): >>41857812 #>>41864750 #
2. qwertox ◴[] No.41857812[source]
Usually looking away is part of a gesture which involves the context, like facial muscles and the information being shared ("Hmm, when was this?": makes the eyes looks up)
3. dTal ◴[] No.41864750[source]
Okay, these options are far enough down the slippery slope to present a compelling argument that the whole thing is a Bad Idea. Short hop from here to suppress_yawns=true, and then breezing through enthusiasm_multiplier=1.4 on to enable_AI_avatar=true with bon_mot_interval=240s...
replies(1): >>41867395 #
4. lloeki ◴[] No.41867395[source]
Did you watch the transformed video with the settings above?

I think you misunderstand the role of "Look Away": it's not like it looks completely sideways, inventing behaviour that does not exist; instead it looks "away" _from the fixed point that would be dead-on camera center_ (that results in this "I'm gonna pierce through your skull with laser eyes" look), substituting it with "when looking - not aiming/scrutinizing - at something, even continuously, human eyes have saccades"

The whole premise of such software (which has already been implemented by Apple in FaceTime with great success) is to _restore_ the reality which is "I'm looking at you but the mechanical offset between camera and window-on-screen destroys the information that I'm in fact looking at you", not invent something that is not real.

Ideally it would even:

- notice actual saccades and reproduce them, only cancelling the offset (super tough, so the next best thing is to fake it, but since these are small, uncontrolled, random-ish movements the approximation is quite sufficient)

- take into account video window position relative to the camera so that if I'm looking away from the window then it stops compensating.

But hey, first implementations are often naive. I give them credit for implementing Look Away because that's one step beyond the naive implementation. I guess it's not the default + tuneables are there because it's still early.