The more magic AI makes, the less magical the world becomes.
Oh shut up. There's plenty of awful uses for ai but this isn't one of them
Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
21–30 of 144 posts
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#22This is very impressive, but “perceptually lossless” isn’t a thing and doesn’t make sense. It means “lossy”.
It is definitely a thing given a good perceptual metric. The metric even doesn't have to be very accurate if the distortion is highly bounded, like only altering the lowermost bit. It is unfortunate that most commonly used distortion metrics like PSNR are not really that, though.
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#23Did not expect to see Emraan Hashmi in this post!
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#24> But one overlooked use case of the technology is (talking head) video compression. > On a spectrum of model architectures, it achieves higher compression efficiency at the cost of model complexity. Indeed, the full LivePortrait model has 130m parameters compared to DCVC’s 20 million. While that’s tiny compared to LLMs, it currently requires an Nvidia RTX 4090 to run it in real time (in addition to parameters, a lar…
One cool use would be communication in space - where it's feasible that both sides would have access to high-end compute units but have a very limited bandwidth between each other.
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#25> But one overlooked use case of the technology is (talking head) video compression. > On a spectrum of model architectures, it achieves higher compression efficiency at the cost of model complexity. Indeed, the full LivePortrait model has 130m parameters compared to DCVC’s 20 million. While that’s tiny compared to LLMs, it currently requires an Nvidia RTX 4090 to run it in real time (in addition to parameters, a lar…
One use case might be if you have limited bandwidth, perhaps only a voice call, and want to join a video conference. I could imagine dialling in to a conference with a virtual face as an improvement over no video at all.
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#26Did not expect to see Emraan Hashmi in this post!
Indeed! Bollywood makes it to HN xD
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#27> But one overlooked use case of the technology is (talking head) video compression. > On a spectrum of model architectures, it achieves higher compression efficiency at the cost of model complexity. Indeed, the full LivePortrait model has 130m parameters compared to DCVC’s 20 million. While that’s tiny compared to LLMs, it currently requires an Nvidia RTX 4090 to run it in real time (in addition to parameters, a lar…
One use case might be if you have limited bandwidth, perhaps only a voice call, and want to join a video conference. I could imagine dialling in to a conference with a virtual face as an improvement over no video at all.
[dead]
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#28This is very impressive, but “perceptually lossless” isn’t a thing and doesn’t make sense. It means “lossy”.
why not? if you change one pixel by one pixel brightness unit it is perceptually the same. for the record, I found liveportrait to be well within the uncanny valley. it looks great for ai generated avatars, but the difference is very perceptually noticeable on familiar faces. still it's great.
GP is correct, that’s the definition of “lossy”. We don’t need to invent ever new marketing buzzwords for well-established technical concepts.
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#29The more magic AI makes, the less magical the world becomes.
What did you mean by this?
Re: Perceptually lossless (talking head) video compression at 22kbit/s
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know metahuman. As impressive as it is, when you judge by the standards of game graphics, if you are ever mislead into thinking metahumans are real humans or even real physically existing things it's time to see your eye doctor (and/or do MRI head scan). On the other hand AI videos can be easily mistaken for people or hyper realistic physical sculptures. https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aYQ776w_460svvp9.webm T…
"AI" videos make many errors all the time, but most people are not aware of what to look for... Undetectable CGI is done in film/games all the time, and indeed it takes talent to hide the fact it is fake. One could rely on the media encoder to garble output enough to look more plausible (people on potato devices are used to looking at garbage content.) However, at the end of the day the "uncanny valley" effect takes…
Undetectable CGI in games ... right. I don't think you are a gamer.
In movies it can be done with enough of manual tweaking by artists and a lot of photographic content around to borrow sense of reality from it.
"Potato" devices by which I assume you mean average phones, currently have better resolutions than PCs had very recently and a lot still do (1080p).
And a photo on 480p still looks more real than anything CGI (not AI).
Your signature is hilarious. I won't comment about the reasons because I don't want this whole thread to get flagged.