This is why everyone is giving up on HDR, it’s just too painful because the content distributors are all so bad at it, with Netflix being the sole exception.
It's more reliable then on linux though, and windows has been doing "auto HDR" for videos for years, so kinda hard to tell when something is HDR or not there.
To use a analogous workflow, it could be like saying, "It's pointless to shoot video in 10-bit log if it's going to be displayed on Rec.709 at 8-bits." It completely leaves out available transforms and manipulations in HDR that do have a noticeable impact even when SDR is the target.
Again, we can't know if it's important given the information that's available, but we can't know if it's pointless either.
The "super resolution" showcased in the video seemed almost identical to adjusting the "sharpness" in any basic photo editing software. That is to say, perceived sharpness goes up, but actual conveyed details stays identical.
I looked back about a year ago, and it didn't seem like there were any good open-source solutions.
And that's by avoiding the word "topaz", where I see no story results with discussions and not much of comment results.
What I'd like to try at some point is to let some AI/ML model process the frames, and instead of necessarily scaling it up to 4k etc., 'just' add (aka magic) missing detail into 1080p version and generally unblur it.
Is there anything out there, even in research phase that can take existing video stock, and then hallucinate into it detail that never was there to begin with? What NVidia is demoing here seem like steps to that direction...
I did test out Topaz Video and DaVinci's built-in super resolution feature, both of which gave me a 4k video with some changes to the original. But not the magic I am after.
Correcting the speed and interpolating frames added an amazing amount of detail that wasn't perceptible to me in the originals (albeit it was there).
All of this processing does remove some of the charm of the medium, so I'll be keeping the original scans in any case.
Regarding hallucination, I agree with the sibling comment, the problem is that faces change. And with video, I'm not even sure the same person would have the same face in various parts of the video...
- Is there any stand-alone live AI upscaling / 'enhance' alternative for android or any other platform?
In fact it's reportedly the currently supported Android device out there with the longest support[0], it's crazy that mine still gets updates.
[0]https://www.androidcentral.com/android-longest-support-life-...
I have been meaning to see how well it handles streaming a desktop via moonlight to the shield to real time upscale a second monitor's content. I assume it's trained for video footage and not static UI components. The RTX windows drivers don't seem to upscale as well as the shield.
It’s pricey, and being so old, I fear it will soon be obsoleted…
The way i see it, if the ai generated HDR looks good, why not? It wouldn't be more fake or made up than the rest of the video.
I miss 3D. I loved it, and I was sad that it didn't catch on. It enjoyed a longer life in Europe, where 3D blu-rays were produced for a few more years after they stopped selling them in the US, and I imported and enjoyed several.
Maybe Apple's VR headset will be a 3D renaissance.
At a theater you sit down knowing that you can't get up and leave until it's over. At home you are doing other things: eating, folding laundry, going to the bathroom, taking phone calls, answering the door, and so on. It's not conducive to wearing glasses.
Vision will have the same problem (as does any at home headset). I don't think it will lead to a 3D renaissance, at least not for a long time, until it becomes acceptable (and feasible) to walk around with it on all the time.
Otherwise we need to wait for holographic projectors that can make a 3D image without having to wear glasses that make it hard or impossible to look at other 3D objects.
There is so much marketing BS in one small paragraph. For starters, generating(/hallucinating) data is imho the opposite of preserving anything. Then HDR is less associated with "intricate details" and more to do with color reproduction. Finally, video compression is the one thing that usually does not have problems with HDR, even the now venerable x264 can handle HDR content, generally it's almost everything else that struggles.
Of course in a true marketing tradition, none of the things are also strictly false. I'm sure there are many ways to weasel the claims.
