81–90 of 119 posts
Anyone tried using lidar and just cut/measure distance to the object?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With regards to the sodium vapor process, an idea has been percolating in the back of my head ever since I saw that video. But I don't really have the budget to try it out. theory: make the mask out of non-visable light illuminate the backing screen in near Infra-Red light. (after a bit of thought I chose near-IR as opposed to near-UV for hopefully obvious reasons) point two cameras at a splitting prism with a near I…
I'll do you one better, which requires no special cameras (most have IR filters) nor double cameras or prisms. Shoot the scene in 48 or 96 fps. Sync the set lighting to odd frames. Every odd frame, the set lights are on. Every even frame, set lights are off. For the backing screen, do the reverse. Even frames, the backing screen is on. Odd frames, backing screen is off. There you go. Mask / normal shot / Mask normal…
Since they added it a year or so ago it has been game-changing. I'm cutting out portraits every day and having a magical tool that cuts out the subject with perfect hair cut out with a single click is sci-fi.
Here's a demo of Photoshop's tool:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNVJN6PKeGQ
(the other magical Photoshop tool is the one that removes reflections from windows, which is even more insane when you reverse it and tell it you only want the reflection and not what's on the other side of the glass)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Incandescent and fluorescent lights already flicker at your AC power frequency. Just gotta be higher than that
No. Incandescent lights flicker at twice your AC power frequency -- to a decent approximation, their power is proportional to V^2. But this is input power -- the cooling of the filament is slowish and the modulation depth is low. Most people aren't bothered by this. Fluorescent lights with old or very crappy "magnetic" ballasts flicker at twice the mains frequency, with deep modulation. The effect on people varies fr…
I'm a software engineer that, like the vast majority of you, uses AI/agents in my workflow every day. That being said, I have to admit that it feels a little weird to hear someone who does not write code say that they built something, without even mentioning that they had an agent build it (unless I missed that).
There's still a bug: the glass with water does not distort the checker pattern in the background at 24:12.
As far as alternatives, I wonder if anyone has tried a screen that cycles through colors in a known sequence. Using this modulating-color screen, it might actually be easier to separate the subject because you get around the "green shirt over green screen" problem. You might even be able to use a time sampling to correct the light cast on the subject from the screen as you would have a full spectrum of response. I co…
Anyone tried using lidar and just cut/measure distance to the object?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. But the main issue is in the way they formulate the problem. Their output is always a transparency mask, which of course will never handle distortions.
Right. Things like this are why it’s difficult integrating AI into professional movie pipelines— they’re super complex in ways AI cannot (yet) replicate for very good reasons that seem superfluous or trivially replaceable by people not familiar with them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>there’s no way that’s going to happen automatically They train their model in a pretty straightforward way, it can also be used to capture the distortion as well, just use a non-monochrome (possibly moving) background optimized for this. It's a matter of effort and attention to detail during training (uneven green screen lighting, reflections, etc), not fundamental impossibility
Yes. But the main issue is in the way they formulate the problem. Their output is always a transparency mask, which of course will never handle distortions.