How long until we can use AI to create widescreen versions of old shows?
 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
|
How long until we can use AI to create widescreen versions of old shows?
How long until we can use AI to create widescreen versions of old shows?
|
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
|
we shouldn't. leave the old shows alone
I paid for those pixels on my TV, therefore I don't black bars.
what pixels? you're losing information by cropping you disingenuous c**t
eat shit
FPBP
KYS or watch the content as intended
I will watch a colored version of Casa Blanca, not only that, but it will have color pallet that Wes Anderson movies use on his movie. You can't stop me. All done by AI. Also, it will be widescreen.
You can't stop me.
Pan&Scan has been a thing for decades
And it looks like garbage.
That's one frame, it could pan down to the pothole while George is still pointing at it.
>change the direction too
you are brain damaged
Not the sanctity of the holy direction! israelitebergstein's magnificent vision must not be sullied!
correct solution is open matte
This is the same thing they did with Star Trek TNG and it SUCKS
No they didn't. They kept the 4:3 aspect ratio for the HD remaster of TNG.
they didnt do that AND the recomposited the special effects because it was shot on film, its a superb hd remaster, exactly how they should be done and you're a fricking spastic.
> superb hd remaster
They changed the look of some stuff therefore its an abomination. A proper hd remaster should look the same as the original if downscaled.
The picture makes a good point that the conversion might "look" better for media, but might destroy the composition the director wanted.
For instance
says to have it pan down but it changes the scene. However the scene also doesn't work in widescreen and "zooming out" just adds a bunch of extra space in noise.
If you guys want a good movie to watch that really makes you enjoy square footage (and actually uses it rather than as a limitation), "The Lighthouse" is quite nice. Wide screen would have killed the vibe
The correct solution would be to use the 4:3 version and use AI to autofill the rest of scene. My guess is that this is probably not economically viable yet, because because the AI is not that good do most of the work on its own and not screw up, so you would to have to adjust a lot shit..
Anyway, sure, it will never look as good as if it had been shot originally on 16:9, because the scenes weren't planned like that, but it will be way better than seeing black bars.
Someone did this on few scenes as a proof of work:
That would still add things that were not there so there would be loads of small errors
>doing all this work to just fill in the black bars
what the hell is wrong with just watching something in 4:3?
>hurr durr muh black bars on 16:9
I dont see you homosexuals clamoring to fill in the black bars on 21:9 ultrawide media to make it fill a 16:9 screen
Adding in AI generated filler on the sides just ruins every shots composition.
Remines me of the Snow White Blu-Ray with "DisneyView", which filled in the pillarboxing with new artwork instead of leaving it black.
jfc
Elaine was hot. That is my response to your post.
>widescreen gets bonus content on the sides that 4:3gays will NEVER EVER see
Based
Yeah, a tiny amount of worthless bullshit that was never meant to be seen. You lose a hell of a lot more than you gain by cropping Seinfeld to widescreen.
> remastered aspect ratio
lmao. it looks like trash.
always will, anon. it was understandable back when all we had was 4:3 monitors. there's no fricking excuse for disney to stretch to 16:9 when the original source is 4:3. what a bunch of fricking idiots.
Cropping is actually the correct solution. Since widescreen is not actually wide, but rather just less tall. Had that episode actually been made in widescreen, it would be framed like the cropped version.
>cropping good!
Jesus frick no.
>rebastard
Why would you want to?
Just show it in the original aspect ratio, what's the fricking problem with that?
some people are afraid of the black bars
they literally think is there's something wrong with their tv or they are not using it correctly. wasted space.
like many people I don't mind the bars. but it fricking sucks when you know there's more to be shown.
no
yeah well some people can suck my fricking dick
Black bars on a shitty LCD is pretty distracting, but with OLEDs it's really a non-issue.
get a better LCD or stop giving a frick.
> but it fricking sucks when you know there's more to be shown.
there literally isn't because there wasn't more filmed in the first place
wait until you homosexuals learn about dci flat
that image show more that what you can see in the bluray.
no idea the frick are you talking about. there's always more.
the solution, full frame open matte
I will never forgive apple for not having open matte releases on ipad. They could have saved us from the eternal curse of widescreen, but they chose not to.
is ok as long they don't show something they should not. Give customers the option should be better.
I would rather see a few things I'm not meant to see, than the film be practically unwatchable due to being forced to watch through a narrow slot. Open matte always.
90% of the time you can crop out those things while having more of the frame than both widecreen and 4:3 presentations
I wish all movies were released like the DVDs of the 90s Ninja Turtles movies were. They let you choose which version you want. The open matte, or the theatrical widescreen version.
A lot of times the old full screen version is framed better. Liar Liar is an example. I'd rather watch my VHS tape of it than my DVD of it because of how cramped everything feels on the widescreen version.
in the past at least they had 4:3 in consideration and that may be the reason why things are framed better. nowadays is all wide screen. but even with that they still use ultra wide sometimes. is a director's thing
composition is important. there are shots that are completely ruined when shown in another way. not many movies are worth keeping the composition tho.
anyway at some point you need to stop.
films today are mostly shot in either 1.85:1 or 2.39:1
for example, poor things is shot in 1.66:1
How long until we can use AI to put product placement in old shows and turn everyone black?
We can do that now probably. See
I would even watch movies with different aspect ratios than lose content.
total phoneposter death
Imagine how bad Citizen Kane would be like this given it's reliance on the camera shots being truncated.
This is the problem ay.
>vertical video
Smartphones were a mistake.
Going the other way is the real use for AI. Most widescreen is so tightly framed, its like looking through a slit, you can't see anything.
The correct answer is - S T R E T C H -
Sure, makes things look a bit squished, but you adapt really quickly to it, and can still see the full frame as captured, without blackbars
> this is your mind on 16:9
what the frick are you even on about
imagine cropping just because you enjoy looking at your monitor more than you enjoy watching the fricking video
shiggy
can't believe i share a board with you
as if that was not enough the 16:9 c**ts are trying and well on their way to kill 16:10 too
16:10 (1.6) is actually really close to the academy standard (1.66)
>16:10
8:5, don't be a Black person.
1.6:1
>decimal
>extra digit
Bloat.
just say 1.6, 1.78 and 2.39
>2
bloated
Now deal with 5:3.
1.67
>precision loss
>extra character bloat
Impressive, it simultaneously is too much and not enough.
> >precision loss
we're talking about aspect ratios c**t
not even dci itself cares past two decimal points
> >extra character bloat
what the frick
>not even dci itself cares past two decimal points
Proof?
>what the frick
5:3 - three characters
1.67 - four characters
Bored shitposting, intentionally leaning in to my own moronation.
nta but what is this type of autism called?
How do you rationalists deal with sqrt(2):1?
The aspect ratio of paper.
For me, 7:5 is good enough. But I'm okay with 4:3 and 3:2. I'm not that anon, btw.
>what is stretch
We've had that for many many decades.
The only times it's acceptable to make a widescreen version of a 4:3 show are if it was shot in widescreen but cropped for broadcast (like That '70s Show) or it's computer animated and they go back to the source files and re-render it in widescreen (like South Park).
Framing is important. Just watch with black bars
You can already.
>cutting off half the picture
what kind of moron do you have to be
One Piece (the original anime) on Netflix did pan and scan and it's fricking terrible. It's what made me torrent the entire anime so I could watch it in proper 4:3 glory
>first actually useful application of AI
Never gonna happen mate.
Fortunately black bars aren't that annoying when you have a screen with perfect blacks like OLED.
Can't even see the edges of my screen at night with the lights off.
Yeah you still lose some area but the resolution of old TV shows isn't that good so you don't miss any details. - I prefer it over an even lower resolution larger image.
How the frick do so many morons ITT think that black bars = lost information. It's the aspect ratio it was recorded/produced in, there is no lost information you absolute moronic subhumans, holy shit.
>It's the aspect ratio
Well, that's not the aspect ratio of modern TV. Are you going to invent some TV made from a sci-fi material that can morphs its size to the aspect ratio of the content being currently display? If not, shut up.
I would much rather turn the shitty 16:9 to 4:3
>x.xx:1
frick off with this shit and speak in wholenumbers
don't care what the academy does
there's a 1:1 chance you're scared to reply to me
not just you but everyone doing it
Jesus christ that "remaster" is awful. The crop ruins the scene's joke.
Whole industry moved to 2:1 because of netflix and phones
>AI
Just use integer scaling you fricking morons
>integer scaling
garbage like that cat
I watch old sci fi and cartoons in 16:9 with integer scaling all the time . looks great
Ehm, I would rather nudify shows.