Live data from Hacker News

AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

nytimes.com

71–80 of 270 posts

Re: AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

#71

‘This is not right! You’ve removed all of this stuff! If the negative is scratched, then we should see that scratch.’ People were really hard-core about it.” Dat me! But I shoot and process film on a home made camera, sometimes intentionally degrading the film, or processing without times, or mountain dew instead of water.

Or 15 years ago when I made photographs using no camera and just objects, light, photo paper, dodge, burn, dodge, burn.

Re: AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

#72

Wow, that tweet they link to with a super punched in shot looks really really bad! Hard to believe Cameron thought this looked better than just a normal 4k transfer, yikes. Was really looking forward to a UHD release of The Abyss but now I'm not so sure... https://twitter.com/RazorwireRyan/status/1735753526167347232

The Abyss in only good on VHS, or laserdisc if you have the setup...

Re: AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

#73
post #64

The "AI" versions of the movie stills are darker and "greener" or "bluer" in all cases in this article, which is NOT the case when you watch the movie. It's a mistake on the part of whoever put together the image comparisons. The culprit here is that the non-AI screenshots are taken from presumably 1080p non-HDR sources, while all the AI screenshots are taken from presumably 4K HDR sources. The "AI" images are all di…

Glad you pointed that out, because literally all the “after” images look dreadful. But then im also of the opinion that most HDR content is too damn dark anyway.

> most HDR content is too damn dark anyway.

It's not, though -- it's entirely the problem with players. Not just software players but also TV's.

There are lots of TV shows now that are available in 1080p SDR and in 4K HDR. When you play them both on any player or TV, they should have the same brightness in "regular" scenes like two people talking in a room. They're meant to. HDR is only meant to make a handful of elements brighter -- glowing lightsabers, glints of sunlight, explosions. HDR is never meant to make any of the content darker.

Unfortunately, far too many video players and televisions (and projectors) map HDR terribly. The TV's aren't actually meaningfully brighter, but they want to advertise HDR support, so they map the wider HDR brightness range to their limited brightness, so that lightsabers etc. get the full brightness, but everything else is way too dark. This is the disaster that makes everyone think HDR content is too dark.

When the correct thing to do would be to display HDR content at full brightness so it matches SDR for normal scenes, and then things like lightsabers, glints of sunlight, etc. just get blown out to white. To admit the hardware has brightness limitations and should never have been advertised as HDR in the first place.

So the problem isn't with HDR content. The problem is with HDR players, TV's, and projectors. It's mostly on the hardware side, with manufacturers that want to advertise HDR support when that's a lie, because they're not actually producing hardware that is HDR-level bright enough.

Re: AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

#74
I appreciate the article (eventually) discuss that this is not generative AI—it’s machine learning-enhanced image processing, and it’s not hallucinating and inserting random background characters.

This isn’t really a new debate. This is kinda the “it looks tacky to record a feature film at a high frame rate, Peter Jackson”. We have a cultural visual vernacular that guides how we expect certain media to look, and it just feels weird to have a movie from the last century remastered so that it looks like it was shot on the latest digital camera.

Re: AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

#75

Wow, that tweet they link to with a super punched in shot looks really really bad! Hard to believe Cameron thought this looked better than just a normal 4k transfer, yikes. Was really looking forward to a UHD release of The Abyss but now I'm not so sure... https://twitter.com/RazorwireRyan/status/1735753526167347232

I don't see how these can be compared. They are totally different color schemes. It's possible that if you took the right image and displayed it using the same color scheme as the left image that it would look better than the left image.

Re: AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

#76
I recently watched the new Aliens remaster and actually thought it mostly looked very good. It was definitely a bit jarring at first because it doesn’t look like an 80s movie anymore: it’s too crisp. But once I got over the strangeness of it and realized some of my attachment to the original look was nostalgia I liked it. I do wish they’d kept more film grain, it’s a little too cleaned up, but it looks good nevertheless.

From what I’ve read the same team did all these Cameron remasters, and True Lies was the first one so they were still figuring some stuff out and it’s more flawed as a result. Haven’t seen it yet, though. But based on Aliens I’m interested in rewatching The Abyss.

Re: AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

#77

The "AI" versions of the movie stills are darker and "greener" or "bluer" in all cases in this article, which is NOT the case when you watch the movie. It's a mistake on the part of whoever put together the image comparisons. The culprit here is that the non-AI screenshots are taken from presumably 1080p non-HDR sources, while all the AI screenshots are taken from presumably 4K HDR sources. The "AI" images are all di…

Yeah if the difference is this obvious in a small thumbnail of a heavily compressed image then something probably went wrong. As you said the colours space doesn't look quite right, though I can't identify exactly which mix up took place.

I'm also not too sure about comparing it with some unidentified 'streaming' version. That's like comparing a high resolution digital audio file with a phone call.

Selective sharpening does have a tendency to overemphasize clear edges while leaving the 'unclear' parts untouched, this can give a bit of a plasticy effect especially on skin.

Re: AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

#79
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glad you pointed that out, because literally all the “after” images look dreadful. But then im also of the opinion that most HDR content is too damn dark anyway.

> most HDR content is too damn dark anyway. It's not, though -- it's entirely the problem with players. Not just software players but also TV's. There are lots of TV shows now that are available in 1080p SDR and in 4K HDR. When you play them both on any player or TV, they should have the same brightness in "regular" scenes like two people talking in a room. They're meant to. HDR is only meant to make a handful of ele…

> HDR is only meant to make a handful of elements brighter -- glowing lightsabers, glints of sunlight, explosions. HDR is never meant to make any of the content darker.

I have to do some math to check if this matters or not, but HDR is able to make dark scenes much better too. SDR video doesn't have nearly enough bit depth to represent anything dark well (it's not even 8-bit) whereas 10bit HDR does. So I would expect to see more dark scenes in properly displayed HDR.

Also, in dynamic HDR you should be able to make a dark scene by encoding it brighter and using the metadata to darken it, though I don't remember if it actually works in practice or if anything does it.

Re: AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

#80
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glad you pointed that out, because literally all the “after” images look dreadful. But then im also of the opinion that most HDR content is too damn dark anyway.

> most HDR content is too damn dark anyway. It's not, though -- it's entirely the problem with players. Not just software players but also TV's. There are lots of TV shows now that are available in 1080p SDR and in 4K HDR. When you play them both on any player or TV, they should have the same brightness in "regular" scenes like two people talking in a room. They're meant to. HDR is only meant to make a handful of ele…

Also just to piggy back on this, every television I have ever purchased has been calibrated like HOT, SICK ASS from the factory.

Step ONE every time I buy a TV is to spend a half an hour or so using tons of calibration images to get it dialed in to a sensible setting, and it's shocking how much a lot of them need changed. Almost every TV comes calibrated to be used as a display unit in the store which means contrast is rammed through the roof, brightness is way up, they usually have about 15 different kinds of smoothing or frame interpolation going, "denoisiers," color filtering for some insane reason, it's fucking ridiculous.

This is honestly why most of the time I buy cheap ass off-brand TV's because there's just less bullshit to turn off when the TV has "fewer" features.

Post reply on HN