4 ms·
The demo is totally mind blowing. It's so good it almost seem fake (not saying it is).
by nso 17y ago
The demo is totally mind blowing. It's so good it almost seem fake (not saying it is).
- TNO 17y agoThe bottom right area of the last image example makes me wonder...
- wesley 17y agoI don't see anything special in that area?
- Timothee 17y agoI would say the fact that the "created" mountain goes down outside of the selection with no real reason behind that. Though I'm not saying that it's not real. It would dumb for Adobe to make up such an impressive video.
- Qz 17y agoIf you look at the cloud area above the 'created' mountain, then look at the slope to the left of the mountain (inside the panorama) and the cloud area above that, you can see that it's very similar. My guess as to how this works is that it looks some distance in from the selection edge, and then repeats that outward (or inward), but matches up the edges to the selection. You can see it in the deleted road where the 'desert' on the bottom right of the new area matches the brush to the left of it, but the rest matches the brush to the top and right of it. It's like creating a seamless tiling background, except instead of doing it in a square, it does it in an arbitrary selection path.
- cma 17y agoI don't think so; it looks like it does a lot of stuff in the frequency domain that you wouldn't get by just smearing inwards or outwards along the surface normal of the selection.
- pbhjpbhj 17y agoAt 4:44 it just looks like they masked off an area and then switch off the mask. Looks fake because it's so good - without actually using it one couldn't tell.
- dutchflyboy 17y agoDo you mean the fact that it seems to load in two parts? That's quite normal behaviour, as the images that are used probably have quite a high resolution and the downscaling takes some time. Just try taking any picture with a nice big resolution and then applying an effect. It will load gradually and not at once. If you meant something else, could you explain it a bit clearer?
- pbhjpbhj 17y agoIt looks potentially fake because its such a good final result. In short it's almost unbelievably good (in the video). Elsewhere in the thread I repeated the experiment on one of the images with resynthesizer GIMP plugin and got very good results too, but not quite as good. Of course I could probably have chosen an image which would have appeared to produce equally good results...
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- edd 17y agoI take it you haven't tried content aware scaling in CS4.
- huhtenberg 17y agoI had a thought that it was actually posting a quick job on a Mech Turk when that progress bar was crawling across the screen :)
- micrypt 17y ago"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke :)
- WildUtah 17y ago"Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced" -the contrapositive
- DannoHung 17y agohug That is... just so perfect.
- jacobolus 17y agoBy changing its position in the sentence, you alter the meaning of “sufficient” (this “sufficiently” and this “insufficiently” are not opposites), and the primary implications of the two sentences are thus not contrapositives. Cute though.
- mreid 17y agoI've heard this called Gehm's corollary to Clarke's Third Law.
- pbhjpbhj 17y agoI compared the Adobe CS image with what I could get from resynthesizer on GIMP, http://imgur.com/W8k1B http://imgur.com/W8k1B. GIMP is the top one, I just cut off the stuff outside the selection line and ran it.
- CWuestefeld 17y agoIt's super cool, for sure. But I don't see how it's different from Alien Skin's Image Doctor (http://www.alienskin.com/imagedoctor/index.aspx http://www.alienskin.com/imagedoctor/index.aspx ), which has been available as a plugin for years. I've been using it from PaintShopPro for quite some time.