Live data from Hacker News

VideoGigaGAN: Towards detail-rich video super-resolution

videogigagan.github.io

11–20 of 243 posts

Re: VideoGigaGAN: Towards detail-rich video super-resolution

#11

Video quality seems really good, but limitations are quite restrictive "Our model encounters challenges when processing extremely long videos (e.g. 200 frames or more)". I'd say most videos in practice are longer than 200 frames, so lot more research is still needed.

I guess one can break videos into 200-frame chunks and process them independent of each other.

At 30fps, which is not high, that would mean chunks of less than 7 seconds. Doable but highly impractical to say the least.

Re: VideoGigaGAN: Towards detail-rich video super-resolution

#13
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you ever do that? If you have the high res data you can actually compress the details which are there and then recreate them. No need to have those be recreated, when you actually have them. Downscaling the images and then upscaling them is pure insanity when the high res images are available.

So streaming services can save money on bandwidth

Or low connectivity scenarios that pushes more local processing.

I think it a bit unimaginative to see no use cases for this.

Re: VideoGigaGAN: Towards detail-rich video super-resolution

#14
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you ever do that? If you have the high res data you can actually compress the details which are there and then recreate them. No need to have those be recreated, when you actually have them. Downscaling the images and then upscaling them is pure insanity when the high res images are available.

So streaming services can save money on bandwidth

Meh.

I think upscaling framerate would be more useful.

Re: VideoGigaGAN: Towards detail-rich video super-resolution

#16
I am personally much more interested in frame rate upscalers. A proper 60Hz just looks much better then anything. Also would really, really like to see a proper 60Hz animate upscale. Anything in that space just sucks. But when in the rare cases it works it really looks next level.

Re: VideoGigaGAN: Towards detail-rich video super-resolution

#17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess one can break videos into 200-frame chunks and process them independent of each other.

At 30fps, which is not high, that would mean chunks of less than 7 seconds. Doable but highly impractical to say the least.

You will probably have to have some overhang of time to get the state space to match enough to minimize flicker in between fragments.

Re: VideoGigaGAN: Towards detail-rich video super-resolution

#18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess one can break videos into 200-frame chunks and process them independent of each other.

At 30fps, which is not high, that would mean chunks of less than 7 seconds. Doable but highly impractical to say the least.

7s is pretty alright, I've seen HLS chunks of 6 seconds, that's pretty common I think.

Re: VideoGigaGAN: Towards detail-rich video super-resolution

#19
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you ever do that? If you have the high res data you can actually compress the details which are there and then recreate them. No need to have those be recreated, when you actually have them. Downscaling the images and then upscaling them is pure insanity when the high res images are available.

So streaming services can save money on bandwidth

That's absurd. I think anybody is aware that it is far superior to e.g. compress in the frequency domain than to down sample your image. If you don't believe me just compare a JPEG compressed image with the same image of the same size compressed with down sampling. You will notice a literal night and day difference.

Down sampling is a bad way to do compression. It makes no sense to do NN reconstruction on that if you could have compressed that image better and reconstructed from that data.

Re: VideoGigaGAN: Towards detail-rich video super-resolution

#20
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it's not perfect, though it does appear to be SoTA. Eventually something like this will just be part of every video codec. You stream a 480p version and let the TV create the 4K detail.

Why would you ever do that? If you have the high res data you can actually compress the details which are there and then recreate them. No need to have those be recreated, when you actually have them. Downscaling the images and then upscaling them is pure insanity when the high res images are available.

There's lots of videos where there isn't high res data available
Post reply on HN