21–30 of 197 posts
In his universe, both the interstellar net and combat links between ships are low bandwidth. Hence, video is interpolated between sync frames or recreated from old footage. Vinge calls the resulting video "evocations".
Is it just me or do the videos no longer look natural? I feel like I see highly non-linear movements (parts of the video moving when they shouldn't, or vice-versa), and facial expressions don't really look quite the same.
> Called “Free View,” this would allow someone who has a separate camera off-screen to seemingly keep eye contact with those on a video call.
Am I the only one who thinks eye contact on video calls feels creepy? I think I would prefer this feature to remove eye contact on video calls rather than add it.
> they have managed to reduce the required bandwidth for a video call by an order of magnitude. In one example, the required data rate fell from 97.28 KB/frame to a measly 0.1165 KB/frame – a reduction to 0.1% of required bandwidth. A nitpick, perhaps, but isn't that three orders of magnitude? We've already seen people use outlandish backgrounds in calls, now it's going to be possible to design similar outlandish vie…
Perhaps the example was a best-case, and the usual improvement is about 10x. (That or 'order of magnitude' has gone the way of 'exponential' in popular use. I don't think I've noticed that elsewhere, though.)
> they have managed to reduce the required bandwidth for a video call by an order of magnitude. In one example, the required data rate fell from 97.28 KB/frame to a measly 0.1165 KB/frame – a reduction to 0.1% of required bandwidth. A nitpick, perhaps, but isn't that three orders of magnitude? We've already seen people use outlandish backgrounds in calls, now it's going to be possible to design similar outlandish vie…
> they have managed to reduce the required bandwidth for a video call by an order of magnitude. In one example, the required data rate fell from 97.28 KB/frame to a measly 0.1165 KB/frame – a reduction to 0.1% of required bandwidth. A nitpick, perhaps, but isn't that three orders of magnitude? We've already seen people use outlandish backgrounds in calls, now it's going to be possible to design similar outlandish vie…
> A nitpick, perhaps, but isn't that three orders of magnitude? I dunno that I'd call it three orders - it's close at about 830x - but it's definitely not even close to being one order either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
fair, in that they aren't perfect photorealism, but if their comparisons with the regular codecs and techniques are correct, I'd take their modelled faces over the comparable- level of digital artifacts for the same bandwidth. After all, it doesn't need to be said that when you're on a regular videoconferencing call and bandwidth starts to suffer, the resulting images don't really look anything like a photorealistic…
The thing is you only want to make this trade-off when the bandwidth is actually starting to suffer. It'd be nice if there was a nice way to make this adaptive and use NNs only when throughput is low, but the nonlinearity of the distortions makes me think this would be really hard. [1] I know what I don't want is for a normal conversation in an uncongested network to look unnatural or for facial expressions to get di…
https://blog.emojipedia.org/apples-new-animoji/
And how well does that work when you switch to screen sharing?