4 ms·
> Except, and this is really the fundamental catch, it's not so much "enhance" as it is "project a believable substitute/interpretation". I would argue that th
by sweezyjeezy 9y ago
> Except, and this is really the fundamental catch, it's not so much "enhance" as it is "project a believable substitute/interpretation".
I would argue that this is a form of enhancement though, and in some cases will be enough to completely reconstruct the original image. For example, if I give you a scanned PDF, and you know for a fact that it was size 12 black Ariel text on a white background, this can feasibly let you reconstruct the original image perfectly. The 'prior' that has been encoded by the model from the large amount of other images increases the mutual information between grainy image and high-res. The catch is that uncertainty cannot be removed entirely, and you need to know that the target image comes from roughly the same distribution as the training set. But knowing this gives you information that is not encoded in the pixels themselves, so you can't necessarily argue that some enhancement is impossible. For example with celebrity images, if the model is able to figure out who is in the picture, this massively decreases the set of plausible outputs.
- trevyn 9y ago> The catch is that you need to know that the target image comes from roughly the same distribution as the training set. When humans think about "enhance", they imagine extracting subtle details that were not obvious from the original, which implies that they know very little about what distribution the original image comes from. If they did, they wouldn't have a need for "enhance" 99% of the time -- the remaining 1% is for artistic purposes, which this is indeed suited for. It'll be interesting to see how society copes with the removal of the "photographs = evidence" prior. > when enhancing celebrity images, if the model is able to figure out who is in the picture this massively decreases the set of plausible outputs. This is an excellent insight.
- ZenPsycho 9y agoDo you think knowing which state the license plate is from is enough prior knowledge?
- yorwba 9y agoSee also https://dheera.net/projects/blur https://dheera.net/projects/blur
- LeifCarrotson 9y agoOr it might not! This reminds me of the Xerox bug from a couple years ago, that turned one number into another. http://www.dkriesel.com/en/blog/2013/0802_xerox-workcentres_are_switching_written_numbers_when_scanning http://www.dkriesel.com/en/blog/2013/0802_xerox-workcentres_... Enhancing some things incorrectly would be worse than leaving them ambiguous.