Slashdot Mirror


Video Inpainting Software Deletes People From HD Video Footage

cylonlover writes "In a development sure to send conspiracy theorists into a tizzy, researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Informatics (MPII) have developed video inpainting software that can effectively delete people or objects from high-definition footage. The software analyzes each video frame and calculates what pixels should replace a moving area that has been marked for removal. In a world first, the software can compensate for multiple people overlapped by the unwanted element, even if they are walking towards (or away from) the camera."

36 of 124 comments (clear)

  1. Summary Fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Background has to be static for it to work.

    Nevertheless, an interesting accomplishment.

    1. Re:Summary Fail by Knuckles · · Score: 2

      Background has to be static for it to work.

      Nevertheless, an interesting accomplishment.

      Surely the person has to move far enough across the static background to reveal at last in one frame what's behind the person? I mean, if I'm standing in front of a dwarf for the whole duration of the video, how is the software to know about the dwarf?

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    2. Re:Summary Fail by Psyborgue · · Score: 2

      It doesn't know, but if this works like Photoshop's content aware fill, it can convincingly fake the rest of the wall. That being said, it's my experience that older, manual methods, usually work better.

    3. Re:Summary Fail by jimshatt · · Score: 4, Informative

      But, then, how is anyone else to know about the dwarf. From the viewer's perspective the dwarf doesn't exist. For that matter, dwarfs might not even exist at all!
      If you look at the video, though, the background doesn't have to be static. Objects moving over other moving objects can be removed as well. But, yeah, they have to be visible at some point.

    4. Re:Summary Fail by Cornwallis · · Score: 5, Funny

      But, then, how is anyone else to know about the dwarf. From the viewer's perspective the dwarf doesn't exist.

      I hit a dwarf on the way to work today.

      We got out of our cars to exchange information.

      He said, "I am not happy."

      I asked, "Which one are you?"

      Then the fight started.

    5. Re:Summary Fail by grumbel · · Score: 5, Informative

      Background has to be static for it to work.

      Nope

    6. Re:Summary Fail by Psyborgue · · Score: 4, Informative

      Absolutely false. Check the Pax Planck page.

    7. Re:Summary Fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That being said, it's my experience that older, manual methods, usually work better.

      Yes, but how fast can you manually remove someone from 30 seconds of video? You're talking about manually touching up over 700 pictures. How many can you do in a day? This software would probably do that 30 seconds in 30 seconds.

    8. Re:Summary Fail by show+me+altoids · · Score: 3, Funny

      This is not a Howard Stern reference, it is a Snow White reference.

      --
      I feel sorry for people that don't drink, because when they get up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel
  2. A boon which is sure to send Starwars fans into... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Researchers have developed video inpainting to remove the character Jar Jar Binks from the Star Wars Prequals.

  3. Almost like the Samsung Galaxy S4? by the_arrow · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't the new Galaxy S4 have a similar feature, if I read correctly? Although only for photos.

    --
    / The Arrow
    "How lovely you are. So lovely in my straightjacket..." - Nny
  4. Reflections by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I liked the fact that you could still see the pedestrians in the reflections of the display window in the video of the musicians, even though they had been erased from the front end. Like the vampire test, but the other way around.

    1. Re:Reflections by DKlineburg · · Score: 4, Funny

      These are not the vampire reflections you seek. . .

      --
      Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
    2. Re:Reflections by mrbester · · Score: 4, Informative

      Have these people never seen Rising Sun? This was a plot point 20 years ago.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    3. Re:Reflections by dintech · · Score: 4, Funny

      I suppose NASA can use this to make it look like the astronauts weren't on the grassy knoll. Oh wait, I'm getting my conspiracies mixed up...

    4. Re:Reflections by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      Have these people never seen Rising Sun?

      I've not only seen that book, I also bothered to read it. As usual, it was better than the adaptation.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  5. oh, great by roman_mir · · Score: 5, Funny

    So combine this tech with Google Glass and identify people you just don't want to see ever again, and you may end up walking right into them without even knowing.

    1. Re:oh, great by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Rainbows End, by Vernor Vinge. What you described is just the beginning.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:oh, great by geekmux · · Score: 4, Funny

      So combine this tech with Google Glass and identify people you just don't want to see ever again, and you may end up walking right into them without even knowing.

      "Hey dude, what's u...Ow! Dude, what the hell, you just ran into me!"

      "Oh hey, sorry about that. I had you flagged as spam. Didn't even see you there."

  6. What's next? by eric31415927 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ten years ago, I predicted a "nudie button," which, instead of removing people from live video, would simply remove their clothing (through interpolation). I do not endorse the use of such a button on your TV's remote control, I merely predict its future existence.

    1. Re:What's next? by docmordin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What you proposed isn't that far-fetched, as I ended up having to contrive and implement the equivalent of this, i.e., passive, automated estimation of body shape under clothing, either from a single image or from multiple video frames, for some work I did in action recognition that required a fairly accurate representation of the person's proportions. Others, e.g., A. O. Balan and M. J. Black, "The naked truth: Estimating body shape under clothing," in Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2008, pp. 15–29, have come up with solutions too.

  7. Re:Reflections on the window not removed by DKlineburg · · Score: 2

    Where the reflections masked? I would think you could remove them too, you just need to select them as well. I'm at work, so am unable to see the videos till I get home.

    --
    Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
  8. Re:Conspiracy Theorists? by DKlineburg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You got that wrong. Now they will say see, we told you this existed. But if this is what they are willing to show us, think how more powerful the government version is that they won't show us? They can remove you from one video walking down the street, and put you in the same scene last week (ATM time stamp) robbing someone!

    --
    Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
  9. so, an end to surveillance cameras? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If we extrapolate this, perhaps we won't be able to trust video as evidence any longer, so there's no reason to have all these surveillance cameras around.

    1. Re:so, an end to surveillance cameras? by geekmux · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If we extrapolate this, perhaps we won't be able to trust video as evidence any longer, so there's no reason to have all these surveillance cameras around.

      The corrupt legal system will never allow that amount of common sense to creep in.

      And we're slowly being made irrelevant to do anything about it.

    2. Re:so, an end to surveillance cameras? by Hatta · · Score: 2

      It's already well established that eye witness testimony is highly unreliable and it's still treated as the most important evidence in any criminal case.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  10. Stalin by kevingolding2001 · · Score: 2

    Joseph Stalin would have loved this.

  11. Very ancient technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    People have been doing this for far more than the last 5 years. It is a trivial application of so-called 'optical flow' where motion vectors are used to identify independently moving objects within a scene.

    One interesting application (seen, for instance, in the Will Smith film "I am legend") takes video footage of a real environment, and converts the footage into a virtual static 'texture' for the background elements. Artists can then repaint over this 'texture' to add damage to buildings etc. The new texture can now be reapplied to the original footage, so the moving shot appears to show the artistic changes in visual context. Clearly this method will not stand up to the same scrutiny as remodelling buildings in CGI, and inserting them into a virtual set, but it works well for backgrounds.

    Films today frequently use a so-called skybox- a 360 panorama stitched from multiple still photos shot on location. This skybox allows a virtual background to be 'projected' behind the actors (say when they are pretending to be on top of a tall building or mountain) that can track the rotational movement of the camera.

    The idea of element extraction forms the basis of various camera enhanced video games found on the current consoles. Usually, the technique is the reverse of the example in the article, where it is the background that is removed so that the player may be isolated and inserted into a virtual scene.

    Slashdot needs editors that know something about technology, but that isn't going to happen while the owners of Slashdot use the tech stories to draw readers to the constant anti-Iranian warmongering propaganda that appears here almost daily.

    1. Re:Very ancient technology by geekmux · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ...The idea of element extraction forms the basis of various camera enhanced video games found on the current consoles. Usually, the technique is the reverse of the example in the article, where it is the background that is removed so that the player may be isolated and inserted into a virtual scene.

      Uh, yeah, and now that we've revealed that removing someone is "ancient technology" is is exactly this reversed scenario that most should fear today and is ripe for abuse in a corrupt world.

      One day, you think it's cool that you've been "painted" into a video game...until you realize that same technology can "paint" you right into Exhibit A: The murder scene.

      How long before innocent people are framed? Judges can't even understand how the internet works. You think they're going to grasp this and give you a fair trial?

    2. Re:Very ancient technology by Psyborgue · · Score: 2

      The camera games, so far as I know, still require a background plate to be taken as calibration before the game starts so it can generate a difference mask. Apple's photo booth software on mac also does this, though it only works if your clothing differs enough from the background (otherwise you become transparent). If your background or lighting doesn't change, it works great. This seems to be much advanced than diff mask. shift map or simple optical flow techniques in that they're regenerating occluded bits of people as well as just the background (see gizmag article picture, midway down the page, where the dude's arm was fixed). It also seems to work with a free-moving camera, meaning you don't have to have a fancy camera rig to shoot the footage twice in order to get a clean background. You still have to manually mask the foreground elements, however.

    3. Re:Very ancient technology by cffrost · · Score: 3, Informative

      One day, you think it's cool that you've been "painted" into a video game...until you realize that same technology can "paint" you right into Exhibit A: The murder scene.

      How long before innocent people are framed? Judges can't even understand how the internet works. You think they're going to grasp this and give you a fair trial?

      Already, people are routinely convicted based on bullshit forensic pseudoscience: PBS Frontline: The Real CSI [torrent]

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  12. Common software by thoughtlover · · Score: 2

    Software of this type has existed for a long time. It's commonly used for rig removal, but can be used to remove any object that is 'outlined' for removal. Next-and-last frame comparison is what 'batch clones-out' the outlined object. It's the same tech that Boujou used (vector analysis, per-pixel tracking via next-current-last frame comparison), but that app is/was used more for creating a virtual camera path for a 3D environment... Mokey was pretty good at this type of object removal, too (it's called Mocha, now - www.imagineersystems.com ). This type of software is pretty common and many companies make their own in-house if they have the need, I'd think. Remember how they removed Denzel Washington's character from the remake of The Manchurian Candidate? The real-time aspect is where we're going.. like The Running Man w Schwarzenegger. They used this type of tech in it, but in near real-time. That's scary.

    --
    No sig for you! Come back one year!
  13. I thought what I'd do was... by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes.

  14. Re:Conspiracy Theorists? by moeinvt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not sure if you're making fun of conspiracy theorists or making fun of people who call others conspiracy theorists?

    What you describe was put into law by the 2012 NDAA. There isn't even a "judge" required.

    Government says: "You're a terrorist!" The evidence is secret so you have no right to examine or challenge it. You have no right to legal counsel, no right to ever see a judge or jury, and it's off to prison you go for as long as the government says. Or maybe they just kill you, which they also claim the power to do.

  15. The Laughing Man by SpectreBlofeld · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Anyone reminded of the Laughing Man from Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex?

    A hacker who was able to hack the cybernetic vision of others in real-time to make himself invisible...