Off topic: I remember a few years ago, some students got very impressed by GIMP's Lanczos-3 upscaling that was much better than the photoshop version they had access at the time.
Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor
21–30 of 171 posts
Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor
#22...I guess the enhance jokes were just rendered void! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vxq9yj2pVWk
Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor
#23Neat. If only Adobe would do away with their absurd pricing models. I'll never use an adobe product again after trying to end my subscription with them.
Absolutely. And the results shown in this article aren't particularly impressive. I'll be sticking with photopea.com, even though I get free CC through work.
Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor
#24Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor
#25...I guess the enhance jokes were just rendered void! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vxq9yj2pVWk
edit: I was joking, but people pointing out that you still can't create something out of nothing etc might not be thinking big enough. I think this technology absolutely has the potential to help. police are literally still using artists impressions - photofits, to find perpetrators
Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor
#26...I guess the enhance jokes were just rendered void! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vxq9yj2pVWk
Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor
#27Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor
#28Neat. If only Adobe would do away with their absurd pricing models. I'll never use an adobe product again after trying to end my subscription with them.
Yeah, a monthly payment forever is ridiculous...
Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor
#29Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor
#30As a metrologist (and photographer), the difficulty with these techniques is that they can over-represent the information contained within an image; they present an image of what was "probably" there, rather than representing what was. These aren't so different from our own brains, which remember what we thought we saw, rather than the light that reached our retinas. These methods are already in extensive use (most s…
The point is worth belaboring because people have a tendency to take the output from these systems as Truth, and while they can be interesting and useful, they should not be used for things for which the truth has consequences without understanding their limitations.
You're right to compare this to how our brains reconstruct our own memories, and the implications that has for eyewitness testimony should inform how we consider the outputs from these systems.