11–20 of 52 posts
Wow, this works pretty well. Makes me think of that chapter in Infinite Jest where videoconferencing gets popular, until people start using "optimized" computer-rendered images instead of showing their actual faces, at which point everyone goes back to audio-only.
Wow, this works pretty well. Makes me think of that chapter in Infinite Jest where videoconferencing gets popular, until people start using "optimized" computer-rendered images instead of showing their actual faces, at which point everyone goes back to audio-only.
I wouldn't mind video conferencing with computer generated avatars. I don't video conference to know what the other person looks like, and in fact knowing what they look like just creates lots of unnecessary bias. I do it for the cues from their gestures, facial expressions, the direction they are looking, etc. With a good tracking setup that works perfectly well today with digital avatars.
Wow, this works pretty well. Makes me think of that chapter in Infinite Jest where videoconferencing gets popular, until people start using "optimized" computer-rendered images instead of showing their actual faces, at which point everyone goes back to audio-only.
That defeats the entire purpose of using facial and body expressions that only video provides.
We already have video filters that remove wrinkles and blemishes in videoconferencing to make you look better.
Even if we replace ourselves entirely with computer-rendered images, they're still going to be reproducing our expressions, movements and gestures, which is what matters.
Wow, this works pretty well. Makes me think of that chapter in Infinite Jest where videoconferencing gets popular, until people start using "optimized" computer-rendered images instead of showing their actual faces, at which point everyone goes back to audio-only.
I wouldn't mind video conferencing with computer generated avatars. I don't video conference to know what the other person looks like, and in fact knowing what they look like just creates lots of unnecessary bias. I do it for the cues from their gestures, facial expressions, the direction they are looking, etc. With a good tracking setup that works perfectly well today with digital avatars.
This makes a request to server to get the result back. Hacker News hug of death has already happened. I wish this was deployable to browsers so it was fully stand alone.
The full paper is on https://nvlabs.github.io/face-vid2vid/main.pdf . (It only mentions GPU once, for the training set.)
I'm quite impressed by how NVIDIA Broadcast cleans up a simple webcam image already, on a 3070 GPU; the background blur will get the gap between headphone bridge and head with sharp cuts - it's impressive enough in my books to warrant such a gaming grade GPU for work purposes, if a remote worker.
I have my cam off to the side; I'm really looking forward to being able to try the angle correction!
Wow, this works pretty well. Makes me think of that chapter in Infinite Jest where videoconferencing gets popular, until people start using "optimized" computer-rendered images instead of showing their actual faces, at which point everyone goes back to audio-only.
We've been skirting the line for a while.
If I could, right now I absolutely would prefer to be sending a synthesized avatar then the real me - my desktop setup doesn't allow very optimal camera placement with large monitors, but for maximum impact I ideally want to send my face making direct eye contact with the camera.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't mind video conferencing with computer generated avatars. I don't video conference to know what the other person looks like, and in fact knowing what they look like just creates lots of unnecessary bias. I do it for the cues from their gestures, facial expressions, the direction they are looking, etc. With a good tracking setup that works perfectly well today with digital avatars.
I like faces. Why deny a key part of being human?
I've definitely wanted this on a few occasions, to avoid being discriminated.