4 ms·
Videos aren't a very good source for training data, because they usually contain compression artifacts and motion blur. I've experimented with AI training using
by zirgs 3y ago
Videos aren't a very good source for training data, because they usually contain compression artifacts and motion blur. I've experimented with AI training using video screencaps and, unfortunately - the resulting quality isn't as good as using high resolution still photos.
Another issue with using videos is overfitting, because video frames look too similar to each other. So you can get an inflexible model that always generates a similar background as that in the video.
Good AI training dataset is the opposite of that. It needs to contain different backgrounds and different lighting conditions. And as many different angles and poses as possible. Can't really get that from a single video.
- pbhjpbhj 3y agoOk, but that's the least pertinent part of what they said. It seems you're busy arguing at different FPS -- a person takes endless stills ... that's still relatively low skilled?
- The_Colonel 3y agoI don't mean this in the context of training, but a "photographer" already using a trained model to apply on the video. What the AI/model then needs to do is to extract the subject - person specific features and combine that with trained data. For that, artifacts/motion blur isn't a huge problem.