Comment on How are films recorded
MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 7 months agoWhat the fuck, how did you interpret me saying “not needing AI” as me meaning “because there is infinite real detail”? All I was saying is that AI would be unnecessary to recover the detail available in film with currently existing technology, there are no contradictions in that.
If you misunderstand someone and they correct you, thats not “mansplaining”.
To then act like your interpretation is still absolutely correct, is disingenuous at best, and one-up-manship at worst.
schmidtster@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Because you would absolutely need to fill in information at that point…?
I didn’t misunderstand you… you missed my point dude lmfao. But if you think you were correcting me… yeah I’m the disingenuous one… sure….
MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 7 months ago
Yes, you’d need AI to exceed the level of detail that is in the film… But it never even crossed my mind that you’d want to.
I was simply making the point that AI is unnecessary to match the quality of film, with a digital image.
schmidtster@lemmy.world 7 months ago
See so after insulting me and badgering me that I was incorrect, you missed my point because you couldn’t comprehend the situation where it’s possible. Yet it already is… home videos being scanned and upscaled it’s already a market dude lmfao.
MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 7 months ago
I don’t even know how to respond to this one… You thought I was saying something I wasn’t, and attempted to call me on a mistake I didn’t make, and my taking offense to that is somehow my bad.
And those scans are being upscaled because old home video formats suck, no one was buying cinema cameras to use as camcorders. And the methods to scan these old formats suck even more, so upscaling has used to create detail to even come close to matching current consumer video formats.
This is no way equivalent to cinema quality film.
MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 7 months ago
I’m not correcting what you said, I’m correcting what you think I said.
AI could add detail that isn’t there in the film, but it is unnecessary to recover detail that IS there because we absolutely have the tech to get the full detail that is available in the film. No need to make up for lost detail with AI.
Film is also so so insanely high detail, that the idea of enhancing it further never even occurred to me. It’d be utterly pointless.
There is only a contradiction if you interpret my words in a way I didn’t intend.
schmidtster@lemmy.world 7 months ago
So we have an electron scanner that scan higher resolution than limited resolution film… and we don’t need AI because the resolution is available if we were to scan it…? What…?
Yeah that’s contradictory and exactly what you said…… sorry.
You also said earlier something completely different about film not being insanely high quality….
I can only interpret the words as you’ve stated them, and you’ve argued multiple conflating and contradictory points.
So what is it? Limited quality? Higher quality than we could ever see? Can’t remaster forever? Can?
MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 7 months ago
No, we can scan things at a molecular level, I never said that’d produce a result beyond what’s there in the grain, why would you think I meant that?
I said it’s not infinite, film only carries detail down to its grain size. That detail is still insanely high, but not “infinite” and as such you won’t be able to just keep re-scanning it forever, at ever higher detail.
No I haven’t, you read meaning from my words that wasn’t there.
Yes.
Also yes. These things can be true at the same time.
Still yes, eventually you’d be scanning at a higher level of detail than what is there. And by that point, you’d have achieved resolutions that exceed the human eye. Though this depends on what kind of film the master is on. Some works will be on grain and film sizes that didn’t have that high quality to begin with.