11–20 of 89 posts
Extreme compression will be when you put in a movie and get a SORA prompt back that regenerates something close enough to the movie.
I can imagine that in under 5 years, the movie's script plus one example still photo for each scene could do the job.
It’s uncanny how much of the current stuff has been predicted by the sitcom -“Silicon Valley”
Extreme compression will be when you put in a movie and get a SORA prompt back that regenerates something close enough to the movie.
Extreme compression will be when you put in a movie and get a SORA prompt back that regenerates something close enough to the movie.
“Alexa show me Star Wars but with Dustin Hoffman as Luke”.
“On the other hand, I can generate endless amounts of Harlan Coben miniseries… :-P”
> It can be observed that our model outperforms them at low bitrates It can? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the graphs but it doesn't look like it to me?
Graphs (especially PSNR) aren't a good way to judge video compression. It's better to just watch the video. Many older/commercial video codecs optimized for PSNR, which results in the output being blurry and textureless because that's the best way to minimize rate for the same PSNR.
Even with that, showing H.265 having lower PSNR than H.264 is odd --- it's the former which has often looked blurrier to me.
From the description, it looks like it's only being tested with 128x128 frames, which implies that the speed is very low.
> It can be observed that our model outperforms them at low bitrates It can? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the graphs but it doesn't look like it to me?
Graphs (especially PSNR) aren't a good way to judge video compression. It's better to just watch the video. Many older/commercial video codecs optimized for PSNR, which results in the output being blurry and textureless because that's the best way to minimize rate for the same PSNR.
How fast is this and how big is the decoder/encoder? The model weights are not accessible. From the description, it looks like it's only being tested with 128x128 frames, which implies that the speed is very low.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sloot_Digital_Coding_System
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Graphs (especially PSNR) aren't a good way to judge video compression. It's better to just watch the video. Many older/commercial video codecs optimized for PSNR, which results in the output being blurry and textureless because that's the best way to minimize rate for the same PSNR.
Many older/commercial video codecs optimized for PSNR, which results in the output being blurry and textureless because that's the best way to minimize rate for the same PSNR. Even with that, showing H.265 having lower PSNR than H.264 is odd --- it's the former which has often looked blurrier to me.