SomethingStarWarsRelated said:
So I used up all but 2 of my Topaz’s Starlight credits on old home video clips (which do look pretty dang good btw). With the 2 credits I had left, I ran a clip of Palps from the deleted senate scene in AOTC (Phase3’s upscaled version:
This looks pretty dang amazing. Much more definition in the face.
Sorry, I couldn’t make a comparison video…you’ll have to compare it yourself! 😛
As per our PM conversation:
The image has too much AI processing; it now looks like an AI-generated image, instead of a human being.
Fine details have been scrubbed away, making his face look too smooth, almost waxy; plus there is less detail in his clothing.
Midtones and highlights have been exaggerated, and it’s slightly oversaturated too.
Take a look at his eyes, and areas around his mouth - compare this video to the original video, or my upscale, and you’ll see they’re quite different.
I’ve heard a lot about this Starlight model, however if this is what it produces, then I will stick with what I currently have.
Yeah, I’m gonna agree with Phase3, the AI does something weird to the clothing/lighting, and the face has become uncanny. My gut tells me that the effect would break down entirely if the clip ran longer.
However, I’m really glad SSWR ran that test, because I’m always curious to see how AIs think about lighting. I don’t think AI will ever be able to make a truly convincing image any more than manmade CGI looks super janky if the animator didn’t account for real world lighting. Light is almost impossible to effectively calculate mathematically, so for my money a lot of what makes cinematic lighting CG or otherwise “good” comes from the art-side rather the science-side of filmmaking.