3 ms·

From the sample images, all I can see is that the "DSLR"-ized images look brighter and have subtly more pleasing colors. But is that all to it? Am I missing the

by nayuki 9y ago

From the sample images, all I can see is that the "DSLR"-ized images look brighter and have subtly more pleasing colors. But is that all to it? Am I missing the big picture?

jszymborski 9y ago
Was thinking exactly the same thing. From those images alone, it's not entirely clear that the same can't be achieved by brightness/contrast and hue/saturation sliders.
- Double_a_92 9y ago
  But then somebody has to decide how much contrast and saturation to set?
maxxxxx 9y ago
I agree. It looks like something you could do quickly in Lightroom. Raise the shadows, lower the highlights, set white balance. Maybe you could use the same algorithm for DSLR RAW pictures and then get real DSLR quality?
- bdamm 9y ago
  In which case, the neural net doing the sampling is yours.
- bcraven 9y ago
  I believe the whole point of this method is it automatically chooses /how far/ to move those sliders to get closest to the result you'd expect.
jaydub 9y ago
my first reaction was, it looks like an HDR effect
- m3kw9 9y ago
  Maybe the AI determined brightening the image is all it’s needed, who knows what the reasoning was lol
TazeTSchnitzel 9y ago
If you right click and view the images in a tab (at higher resolution!), they basically all look look like they've had a brightness/contrast and sharpness filter applied. Honestly, I much prefer the originals, they look cleaner and the lighting is less harsh with better contrast. But maybe I just have unusual æsthetic tastes. e.g. http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~ihnatova/demo/iphone/1_0.jpg http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~ihnatova/demo/iphone/1_0.jpg (original) vs http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~ihnatova/demo/iphone/1_2.jpg http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~ihnatova/demo/iphone/1_2.jpg (modified)
- userbinator 9y ago
  Having actually seen DSLR output, I can say that neither the original nor the "enhanced" version looks anything like what a DSLR can do. The debayering artifacts and noise are still there.
p1esk 9y ago
They tested quality in a blind test, where people were asked to choose a better looking photo originally taken with an iPhone and enhanced by one of the three methods: Apple Photo Enhancer, their CNN method, and a professional graphics artist using Photoshop. 42 people were shown 9 pictures each. From the paper: "Although human enhancement turns out to be slightly preferred to the automatic APE, the images enhanced by our method are picked more often, outperforming even manual retouching."
- KGIII 9y ago
  Someone should put this online as a service and allow things like batch processing. I'd pay for that.

by nayuki 9y ago

From the sample images, all I can see is that the "DSLR"-ized images look brighter and have subtly more pleasing colors. But is that all to it? Am I missing the big picture?

jszymborski 9y ago

Was thinking exactly the same thing. From those images alone, it's not entirely clear that the same can't be achieved by brightness/contrast and hue/saturation sliders.

Double_a_92 9y ago
But then somebody has to decide how much contrast and saturation to set?

maxxxxx 9y ago

I agree. It looks like something you could do quickly in Lightroom. Raise the shadows, lower the highlights, set white balance. Maybe you could use the same algorithm for DSLR RAW pictures and then get real DSLR quality?

bdamm 9y ago
In which case, the neural net doing the sampling is yours.
bcraven 9y ago
I believe the whole point of this method is it automatically chooses /how far/ to move those sliders to get closest to the result you'd expect.

jaydub 9y ago

my first reaction was, it looks like an HDR effect

m3kw9 9y ago
Maybe the AI determined brightening the image is all it’s needed, who knows what the reasoning was lol

TazeTSchnitzel 9y ago

If you right click and view the images in a tab (at higher resolution!), they basically all look look like they've had a brightness/contrast and sharpness filter applied. Honestly, I much prefer the originals, they look cleaner and the lighting is less harsh with better contrast. But maybe I just have unusual æsthetic tastes. e.g. http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~ihnatova/demo/iphone/1_0.jpg http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~ihnatova/demo/iphone/1_0.jpg (original) vs http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~ihnatova/demo/iphone/1_2.jpg http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~ihnatova/demo/iphone/1_2.jpg (modified)

userbinator 9y ago
Having actually seen DSLR output, I can say that neither the original nor the "enhanced" version looks anything like what a DSLR can do. The debayering artifacts and noise are still there.

p1esk 9y ago

They tested quality in a blind test, where people were asked to choose a better looking photo originally taken with an iPhone and enhanced by one of the three methods: Apple Photo Enhancer, their CNN method, and a professional graphics artist using Photoshop. 42 people were shown 9 pictures each. From the paper: "Although human enhancement turns out to be slightly preferred to the automatic APE, the images enhanced by our method are picked more often, outperforming even manual retouching."

KGIII 9y ago
Someone should put this online as a service and allow things like batch processing. I'd pay for that.