←back to thread

363 points jay_kyburz | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.231s | source
Show context
ulrikrasmussen ◴[] No.45022875[source]
I think AI-"upscaled" videos are as jarring to look at as a newly bought TV before frame smoothing has been disabled. Who seriously thinks this looks better, even if the original is a slightly grainy recording from the 90's?

I was recently sent a link to this recording of a David Bowie & Nine Inch Nails concert, and I got a serious uneasy feeling as if I was on a psychedelic and couldn't quite trust my perception, especially at the 2:00 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Yyx31HPgfs&list=RD7Yyx31HPg...

It turned out that the video was "AI-upscaled" from an original which is really blurry and sometimes has a low frame rate. These are artistic choices, and I think the original, despite being low resolution, captures the intended atmosphere much better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X6KF1IkkIc&list=RD1X6KF1Ikk...

We have pretty good cameras and lenses now. We don't need AI to "improve" the quality.

replies(27): >>45022937 #>>45023020 #>>45023045 #>>45023060 #>>45023083 #>>45023097 #>>45023236 #>>45023265 #>>45023284 #>>45023337 #>>45023627 #>>45023822 #>>45023850 #>>45024004 #>>45024153 #>>45024192 #>>45024229 #>>45024335 #>>45024523 #>>45024569 #>>45024612 #>>45024842 #>>45025183 #>>45025320 #>>45025687 #>>45025996 #>>45027100 #
prmoustache ◴[] No.45023627[source]
The weird thing is that people are seemingly enjoying this.

Yesterday we went to a store to have a look at a few smartphone for my partner. She primarily wants a good camera above any other parameter. I was seeing her preferring those that were counterfeiting the reality the most: she was like, "look I can zoom and it is still sharp" while obviously there was a delay between zooming and the end result which was a reconstructed, liquid like distorded version similar to the upscaling filters people are using on 8/16bit game console emulators. I was cringing at seeing the person I love the most preferring looking at selfies of picture of us with smoothed faces and a terrible fake bokeh in the background instead of something closer to the reality.

replies(7): >>45023920 #>>45024078 #>>45024149 #>>45024698 #>>45026932 #>>45028686 #>>45032593 #
ulrikrasmussen ◴[] No.45023920[source]
Yes, this is the exact same reason that frame smoothing exists. When you walk into a store, all the TVs are lined up showing some random nature show or sports event, and frame smoothing will make your TV look a little more smooth than the others, even though it completely ruins the content.

It's made for making sales, not for making things actually look good.

replies(1): >>45026042 #
xnorswap ◴[] No.45026042[source]
It doesn't "ruin the content", it's a psychological issue which would be fixed by more high quality productions actually producing high frame-rate content, so the association reverses.

It seems insane to actively make all content worse, having movies worsened down to a lower frame-rate just because we have a hangover from decades old technology.

It's a shame that Peter Jackson's Hobbit wasn't a great movie. Had it been, then maybe it could have been a better driver of high frame-rate movies.

replies(4): >>45026480 #>>45026852 #>>45026987 #>>45027195 #
1. queenkjuul ◴[] No.45026852[source]
Lower framerate isn't worse, it's just different.

But the artifacts introduced by TV frame interpolation absolutely can ruin the content completely.