Live data from Hacker News

Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor

petapixel.com

21–30 of 171 posts

Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor

#21
The samples on the article show very good results at preserving details so that curves do not get blurry when scaled up but are not particularly impressive.

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.

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

I’m not sure if that’s the case with this tech. I could see in the near future a scenario in which many, many individuals (thousands) are photographing the same things in the same area and you can intelligently superimpose things to “enhance”, tho.

Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor

#23
post #11
post #8

Neat. 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.

Creative Cloud was the point I noticed a shift in Adobe's priorities. I don't know if they switched CEO's at the time, but I starting disliking Adobe more and more from that point forward. I couldn't believe the amount of crud Creative Cloud puts on your system, not the mention all of the tracking and phoning home their software does.

Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor

#24
The 'Preserve Details 2.0' upscaler from photoshop does an amazingly good job, in particularly I started with a 500x500 square image of a gundam sketch illustration which showed scan lines when printed directly on a 8 inch square but with 4x4 scaling the image was close to perfect.

Re: 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

CSI and the like were just ahead of their time

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

This demo is fun to see the ML take different guesses at how to inpaint the missing data: http://www.chuanxiaz.com/project/pluralistic/

Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor

#28
post #8

Neat. 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...

I think what bothers me the most is that its not just a monthly subscription. When you sign up, you are entering a one year contract with them. Sure, you can cancel at any time...just pay the remaining amount due and you can walk away.

Re: Adobe Photoshop's 'super resolution' made my jaw hit the floor

#30
post #6

As 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…

I think this point is worth pushing on a bit harder, which is to say that the "additional details" in the picture are guesses by the software, not actual additional details. The data present in the picture is fixed, the software uses that data to build educated guesses on what was actually there. If the photo doesn't contain enough data to actually determine what a given piece of text in the image says, the software can provide a guess, but it's just that, a guess. Similarly, if the photo doesn't provide enough detail to positively identify a person, the "super resolution" one cannot be used to positively identify them either, as it's a guess made from incomplete data, not genuinely new data.

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.

Post reply on HN