Open Menu
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
lotide
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
Login

AI made these movies sharper – critics say it ruined them

⁨3⁩ ⁨likes⁩

Submitted ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨bot@lemmy.smeargle.fans [bot]⁩ to ⁨hackernews@lemmy.smeargle.fans⁩

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/13/movies/ai-blu-ray-true-lies.html

HN Discussion

source

Comments

Sort:hotnewtop
  • Mikufan@ani.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It did ruin them

    source
  • autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    In 1998, Geoff Burdick, an executive at James Cameron’s Lightstorm Entertainment, was hunched in front of a 12-inch monitor at a postproduction house, carefully preparing “Titanic” for release on LaserDisc and VHS.

    Park Road Post Production, the New Zealand company owned by the filmmaker Peter Jackson, helped clean up Cameron’s films using some of the same proprietary machine-learning software used on Jackson’s documentaries “The Beatles: Get Back” and “They Shall Not Grow Old.” The images in Cameron’s classic blockbusters were refined in a way that many felt looked strange and unnatural.

    Home video reviewers have described it as an overly sanitized presentation, with one faulting its “routinely odd-looking images” and another arguing that it appears “almost artificial.” Web forums are teeming with complaints, often vicious, while social media posts criticizing it have spread widely.

    The dissenters, he argued, were mainly just disappointed that “Aliens,” “True Lies” and “The Abyss” no longer look like they did in the VHS or DVD eras.

    was fidelity to the original source: With upscaling, “the enhancement that you get does not measurably change the meaning or the content of the image.” Nevertheless, he said that misunderstandings about the technology have given the whole enterprise a certain ignominy.

    That’s partly because of the condition of the source material: Both films took damaged archival images and appeared to reverse the deterioration, and in one case, to also colorize it.


    The original article contains 1,504 words, the summary contains 232 words. Saved 85%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    source