From the blog post: Here are a couple of enhanced YouTube videos made using this technique: A Trip Through New York City in 1911 Apollo 16 Lunar Rover "Grand Prix" (1972 April 21, Moon)
From the blog post:
Starting from the birth of photographing in the 18-th centuries, videos became important media to keep vivid memories of their age being captured. And it's shown in varying forms including movies, animations, and vlogs. However, due to the limit of video technologies including sensor density, storage and compression, quite a lot of video contents in the past centuries remain at low quality. Among those important metrics for video quality, the most important one is the temporal resolution measured in frame-per-second or fps for short. Higher-frame-rate videos bring about more immersive visual experience to users so that the reality of the captured content is perceived. Therefore, the demand to improve the low-frame-rate videos, particularly the 12fps old films, 5~12fps animations, pixel-arts and stop motions, 25~30 fps movies, 30fps video games, becomes more and more urgent.
Here are a couple of enhanced YouTube videos made using this technique:
I get the soap opera effect hard with frame interpolation, to the point that I'll ask friends and family if I can change their TV settings when I'm at their house. To me, it looks like they've...
I get the soap opera effect hard with frame interpolation, to the point that I'll ask friends and family if I can change their TV settings when I'm at their house. To me, it looks like they've filmed my favorite movies with a camcorder. It ruins the special effects and totally takes me out of the movie experience.
There was this that looked really good: https://youtu.be/sFN9dzw0qH8. It's the same research paper. Full interpolated video: https://youtu.be/7MnGCPUoPNI.
They do look good, if you slow the video down, there are a couple of things I see. The first is smearing. Complex geometries, when both moving and rotating, tend to smear between keyframes. The...
They do look good, if you slow the video down, there are a couple of things I see.
The first is smearing. Complex geometries, when both moving and rotating, tend to smear between keyframes.
The second is shot changes. When the scene changes there' s a random mess of colors generated, though I suppose this is just because the program was trained on continuous video segments, and could be easily repaired.
A third is color bleeding. The program apprarently has trouble keeping track of subtle differences in color, and some frames are distorted as a result.
On the positives: Depth of frame is handled really well, as are rotations of the claw hands. I was expecting to see something wrong with them on a closer look, and they seemed fine for all I could tell. Also, at full speed the video does look pretty good.
One interesting thing is that fast moving objects tend to reverse-fill. So if there's a large enough difference between frames in their position, the object will appear to travel backward briefly, I'm not sure what's causing this.
Some of those issues are flaws from the stop motion. For example sometimes he'll knock the ground. That issue would also be present in the interpolated version. Since the stop motion isn't 100%...
Some of those issues are flaws from the stop motion. For example sometimes he'll knock the ground. That issue would also be present in the interpolated version. Since the stop motion isn't 100% perfect, the interpolation also isn't.
From the blog post:
Here are a couple of enhanced YouTube videos made using this technique:
A Trip Through New York City in 1911
Apollo 16 Lunar Rover "Grand Prix" (1972 April 21, Moon)
I get the soap opera effect hard with frame interpolation, to the point that I'll ask friends and family if I can change their TV settings when I'm at their house. To me, it looks like they've filmed my favorite movies with a camcorder. It ruins the special effects and totally takes me out of the movie experience.
You can see the effect clearly here
It's interesting, but watching the 0.25 speed footage provided, you can see a lot of artifacts.
There was this that looked really good: https://youtu.be/sFN9dzw0qH8.
It's the same research paper.
Full interpolated video: https://youtu.be/7MnGCPUoPNI.
They do look good, if you slow the video down, there are a couple of things I see.
The first is smearing. Complex geometries, when both moving and rotating, tend to smear between keyframes.
The second is shot changes. When the scene changes there' s a random mess of colors generated, though I suppose this is just because the program was trained on continuous video segments, and could be easily repaired.
A third is color bleeding. The program apprarently has trouble keeping track of subtle differences in color, and some frames are distorted as a result.
On the positives: Depth of frame is handled really well, as are rotations of the claw hands. I was expecting to see something wrong with them on a closer look, and they seemed fine for all I could tell. Also, at full speed the video does look pretty good.
One interesting thing is that fast moving objects tend to reverse-fill. So if there's a large enough difference between frames in their position, the object will appear to travel backward briefly, I'm not sure what's causing this.
Some of those issues are flaws from the stop motion. For example sometimes he'll knock the ground. That issue would also be present in the interpolated version. Since the stop motion isn't 100% perfect, the interpolation also isn't.