Hacker News Reader

Comment by georgieporgie | Hacker News Reader

So, why did the whole video look really fake? It seemed to bob around in a very predictable manner. When the first sharpening took effect, it panned and zoomed exactly in time with the appearance of the second image.

I'm not claiming the demo is fake, I'm just wondering why the video looks so strange.

View on HN

I think it would be unreasonable to claim that it is fake anyway, since relevant research has been public for some time. If there's an amount of trickery involved, it's in the parameter files he loaded (they might be nontrivial/nonautomatic to produce).

Again, I'm not questioning the demo, I'm asking why the video has so many very strange traits.

I know, I was referring to people who might question it (such as the posters below you), hence the "anyway".

I'm guessing it's a hand held camera with some stabilization algorithm in post processing.

That plus the kinda fakey-looking screen made me think the whole thing was staged. Then again, if you were going to stage it, you could do a lot better than that camera motion without trying very hard.

You do realize that the video is not from Adobe, but just from visitors of the conference?

Yes. That's what makes the weird motion seem so fake. I expect random movements from a hand-held video, but this really, really had the feel of pseudo-random, repetitive motions that I've seen in CGI effect demos.

All first-look demos like this are staged/faked whatever, why would you think otherwise?

The demo doesn't necessarily look fake, the video looks fake.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com