←back to thread

363 points jay_kyburz | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | 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 #
gyomu ◴[] No.45024149[source]
I’m a photographer, and am on a bunch of beginner photography groups.

These groups used to be a mix of people being confused at how their camera worked and wanting help, people wanting tips on how to take better pictures, and sometimes there was requests for editing pictures on their behalf (eg “I found this old black and white faded picture of my great grandparents, can anyone help restore it?”)

These days, 99.9% of the posts are requests that involve synthesizing an entirely new picture out of one or more other pictures. Examples: “can someone bring in my grandpa from this picture into this other family picture?”. Or “I love this photo of me with my kids, but I hate how I look. Can someone take the me from this other picture and put it in there? Also please remove the cups from our hands and the trees in the background, and this is my daughter’s ex boyfriend please also remove him”.

What’s even crazier is that the replies of those threads are filled with dozens of people who evidently just copy pasted the prompt + picture into ChatGPT. The results look terrible… but the OP is always pleased as punch!

People don’t care about “reality”. Pictures have lost their status of “visual record of a past event”* and become “visual interpretation of whatever this person happens to want”.

There’s no putting back the genie in the bottle.

*: yes, you can argue they were never 100% that, but still, that’s effectively what they were.

replies(7): >>45024178 #>>45024394 #>>45025042 #>>45027116 #>>45027332 #>>45027685 #>>45028968 #
1. slipperydippery ◴[] No.45028968[source]
1) This is, amusingly, kind of a shift back to when portraits had to be painted.

2) This seems very similar to me to those weird fuzzy double-exposure, heavily posed portraits that used to be really popular, or in general not that different from going and having family photos taken at a cheap mall photo studio with one of five shitty looking background-tarps.

I suspect there are some interesting class components to that second one (Fussell may even have mentioned it in his book, I can't recall, but it's definitely the kind of thing that probably could have served his analysis) but overall I think the "unwashed masses" have long preferred really shitty, lazily/poorly staged & manipulated photos to authentic ones. Now they can just apply that same aesthetic preference to photos that weren't originally like that.