[flagged]
Low quality AI comment
AV1@Scale: Film Grain Synthesis, The Awakening
151–160 of 230 posts
Re: AV1@Scale: Film Grain Synthesis, The Awakening
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
The differences are actual film grain vs some atrocious RGB noise artificially added by the streamer. How is that unclear? What else could we be talking about?
Right, the current implementation is bad. In theory though, I don't see any reason why client-side grain that looks identical to the real thing shouldn't be achievable, with massive bandwidth savings in the process. It won't be, like, pixel-for-pixel identical, but that was why I said no director is placing individual grain specks anyway.
> with massive bandwidth savings in the process
Let's be clear. The alternative isn't "higher bandwidth" it's "aggressive denoising during stream encode". If the studio is adding grain in post then describing that as a set of parameters will result in a higher quality experience for the vast majority of those viewing it in this day and age.
Re: AV1@Scale: Film Grain Synthesis, The Awakening
#153To the comments hating on grain: everything naturally has some amount of noise or grain - even the best digital sensors. Heck, even your eyes do. It's useful beyond just aesthetics. It tends to increase perceived sharpness and hides flaws like color banding and compression artifacts. That's not to say that all noise and grain is good . It can be unavoidable, due to inferior technology, or a result of poor creative ch…
My issue is that grain is good based on the creative decisions of the creators of the content. It is not something that a group of nerds compressing 1s and 0s should be making
We live in a world of resource constraints. The nerds compressing 1s and 0s are very much concerned about creative intent. They noticed that compression wrecks that creative intent and wanted to better communicate it in a world with bandwidth limitations.
Re: AV1@Scale: Film Grain Synthesis, The Awakening
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
> provide distributors with a noiseless source plus grain synthesis parameters. What parameters would that be? Make it look like Eastman Ektachrome High-Speed Daylight Film 7251 400D? For years, people have taken film negative onto telecines and created content of grain to be used as overlays. For years, colorists have come up with ways of simulating the color of specific film stocks by using reference film with test…
> If a director/producer wants film grain added to their digital content, that's where it should be done in post. Not by some devs working for a streaming platform. The use of grain or not is a creative decision made by the creators of the work. That's where it should remain Why? If you're spending a significant chunk of your bits just transmitting data that could be effectively recreated on the client for free, isn'…
> once we've established that client-side grain makes sense, what are you going to do about people having preferences?
I already normalize audio (modern US produced media is often atrocious), modify gamma and brightness, and probably some other stuff. Oh and it's not as though I'm viewing on a color calibrated monitor in the first place.
The purists can purchase lossless physical copies. The rest of us would benefit from such improvements.
Re: AV1@Scale: Film Grain Synthesis, The Awakening
#155There are definite philosophical questions over the merits of adding noise, but the problem with their example here is their denoising process appears to excessively blur everything, so both it and the synthesized grain image look noticeably less sharp than the source. The grain itself also looks too much like basic noise, and not really grain like.
> and not really grain like that's an understatement. it just looks like RGB noise effect was added. film grain does not look like RGB noise. to me, film grain is only one part of what gave film the film look. the way the highlights bloom rather than clip. it also was more natural/organic/some descriptive other than the ultrasharp of modern digital acquisition. using some SoftFX or Black Mist type filters help, but i…
Agree, I really prefer luminance noise when simulating film grain rather than treating RGB so independently - the RGB here looks wrong to me. If you are thinking about film, you wouldn't model it as pure photon/detector noise, because film has some crystalline structure and usually there is some correlation between the channels. (Some of the best grain is on B&W films though, which have wonderful structure and statistics.)
Re: AV1@Scale: Film Grain Synthesis, The Awakening
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Film grain and 24fps are both examples of people being far too attached to the technical limitations of film.
23.976 fps has been put on a pedestal as the "correct" look. Just look at the reaction to The Hobbit. However it does provide some objective advantages. 60 fps requires more lighting. Adding more lights means more electric setup and heat for actors in heavy makeup and costume. In post production that's more frames to edit.
> 60 fps requires more lighting.
Assuming the comparison uses the same image sensor for each.
Re: AV1@Scale: Film Grain Synthesis, The Awakening
#157happier and happier about leaving behind digital media to return to physical. to me this is literally slop. i want the uncompressed file stop selling me stepped on product
Uncompressed 4k video is ~5Gbps (3840 * 2160 * 3 * 24 * 8). A 2-hour movie clocks in at about 4.3TB. (3840 * 2160 * 3 * 24 * 60 * 60 * 2) All that is 24fps. That's without audio, which I assume you also want to be uncompressed.
TBF even as bloated as 48/24 FLAC is it's a rounding error at that point.
Re: AV1@Scale: Film Grain Synthesis, The Awakening
#158Fake grain really disgusts me.
This is not fake grain - it's a reproduction of the original grain pattern, compressed separately from the underlying image content. The result is closer to the original picture than the denoised / compressed version.
Depends on your definition of fake. I consider this to have crossed the line from lossy compression to a generative product.
Re: AV1@Scale: Film Grain Synthesis, The Awakening
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
The differences are actual film grain vs some atrocious RGB noise artificially added by the streamer. How is that unclear? What else could we be talking about?
Right, the current implementation is bad. In theory though, I don't see any reason why client-side grain that looks identical to the real thing shouldn't be achievable, with massive bandwidth savings in the process. It won't be, like, pixel-for-pixel identical, but that was why I said no director is placing individual grain specks anyway.
If the original is an actual production shot on film, the film grain is naturally part of it. Removing it never looks good. If it is something shot on a digital camera and had grain added in post, then you can go back to before the grain was added and then do it client side without degradation. But you can never have identical when it originated on film. That's like saying you can take someone's freckles away and put them back in post just rearranged and call it the same.
Re: AV1@Scale: Film Grain Synthesis, The Awakening
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
what does having an in-house studio have to do with it? they stream more content than just their own, and so they would not have creative license to alter content. they would only have some type of distribution license to stream the content as provided
Because they previously did not do commercials their original TV shows were not written with pauses every few minutes. They have approved cameras. They spend heavily on movie star salaries and skimp on set production.
Again, I ask, what does this have to do with anything regarding TFA? Anything in-house studio produces will not be shot on film.