Slashdot Mirror
GPU Accelerated Realtime Skin Smoothing Algorithms Make Actors Look Perfect
dryriver writes: A recent Guardian article about the need for actors and celebrities -- male and female -- to look their best in a high-definition media world ended on the note that several low-profile Los Angeles VFX outfits specialize in "beautifying actors" in movies, TV shows and video ads. They reportedly use a software named "Beauty Box," resulting in films and other motion content that are -- for lack of a better term -- "motion Photoshopped." After some investigating, it turns out that "Beauty Box" is a sophisticated CUDA and OpenGL accelerated skin-smoothing plugin for many popular video production software that not only smooths even terribly rough or wrinkly looking skin effectively, but also suppresses skin spots, blemishes, scars, acne or freckles in realtime, or near realtime, using the video processing capabilities of modern GPUs.
The product's short demo reel is here with a few examples. Everybody knows about photoshopped celebrities in an Instagram world, and in the print magazine world that came long before it, but far fewer people seem to realize that the near-perfect actor, celebrity, or model skin you see in high-budget productions is often the result of "digital makeup" -- if you were to stand next to the person being filmed in real life, you'd see far more ordinary or aged skin from the near-perfection that is visible on the big screen or little screen. The fact that the algorithms are realtime capable also means that they may already be being used for live television broadcasts without anyone noticing, particularly in HD and 4K resolution broadcasts. The question, as was the case with photoshopped magazine fashion models 25 years ago, is whether the technology creates an unrealistic expectation of having to have "perfectly smooth looking" skin to look attractive, particularly in people who are past their teenage years.
The product's short demo reel is here with a few examples. Everybody knows about photoshopped celebrities in an Instagram world, and in the print magazine world that came long before it, but far fewer people seem to realize that the near-perfect actor, celebrity, or model skin you see in high-budget productions is often the result of "digital makeup" -- if you were to stand next to the person being filmed in real life, you'd see far more ordinary or aged skin from the near-perfection that is visible on the big screen or little screen. The fact that the algorithms are realtime capable also means that they may already be being used for live television broadcasts without anyone noticing, particularly in HD and 4K resolution broadcasts. The question, as was the case with photoshopped magazine fashion models 25 years ago, is whether the technology creates an unrealistic expectation of having to have "perfectly smooth looking" skin to look attractive, particularly in people who are past their teenage years.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If not, I don't see much need for it.
"The question...is whether the technology creates an unrealistic expectation of having"
blurry, featureless skin.
It looks silly to me, especially knowing the actors' real life appearance, to see a bunch of living mannequins in a movie. Even the piled on makeup opera or play performers wear looks ridiculous, they're like clowns and I must laugh.
Americans have been using 60-years-old as teenagers in sitcoms for decades, so it's not really going to change anything.
#DeleteFacebook
This technique has been used for still photography for years now, and has the same issue under video (even more so)... There's a very fine line between skin smoothing - and making it look like plastic. When it's overdone, even slightly, you do notice it, and it doesn't look right.
If the resolution of movies is so high that they are essentially applying a blur filter everywher, then maybe we should back off the higher resolutions. What's the point of high res capture if you're just going to muddy the image in post processing?
by the porn industry?
..the porn industry having a field day with this.
I have no problem doing this for fiction.
So, actually, you really don't have a problem with using it in political ads.
Just what we all want, 4k footage with blurry faces.
whether the technology creates an unrealistic expectation of having to have "perfectly smooth looking" skin
As the article alludes, this is nothing more than a digital form of makeup. And that has been used for decades for TV and films - and even longer in the real world.
There really aren't any additional issues here. If is simply a modern version of an old, old, tradition.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
Anyone trying to sell a beauty product and using this should be sued.
Other than this, yes, I think it's a problem that people can't be accepted as they are. Of course we already use makeup, etc., but if anything we should move in the direction of accepting how people look instead of trying to stylise them further.
That's why I prefer English movies and series.
There at least you see real people, not a bunch of 27 year old model types with fake hair, fake teeth, fake boobs and fake noses.
That just makes it look unreal and this will make it still worse, if that is possible.
Using it in things like political ads, well, that's a different question.
Why do you care? Do you base your vote on zit counts?
because young people don't have acne, moles, freckles, warts, scars etc.?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I great computing achievement that raises the bar of illusion higher over a person's head....requiring them to use even more sophisticated solutions to try to reach it.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
I can't wait to get a pair of Google Glasses with this software installed so I don't have to loot at your all's ugly faces anymore. Is there a setting of 11 on this menu?
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
Actors and actresses already spend huge amounts of time in makeup, how does this method compare to that?
Does it compound the effect of makeup so some actress in her late 40s can still get a lead role? Or is it one or the other, meaning that a lot of makeup artists will be out of work once this tech matures.
I stole this Sig
If blemishless looks carried that kind of importance, the movies featuring supermodels wouldn't flop the way they do. This is the action movie fallacy repeated: you can fill a movie with explosions and facial closeups all you want, if you don't actually cater for a convincing plot and convincing actors, you'll bore your audience.
This is not what "here is looking at you, kid" was about.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Apparently the best predictor of electoral success is candidate appearance (not money spent). So many people DO base their vote on zit counts. Although beautifying might not be the best idea for political ads. The predictor for US presidential elections was the candidate who looked "most presidential," which might not be the same as "youngest" or "prettiest."
Make sure you include snippets of other videos which bounce around so much you can't tell what you're looking at.
That way you can show off your product to its full effect.
The real question I have is, when can I get it as an Instagram filter?
Better yet, can I get it installed on my date's glasses? Come to think of it, maybe it'd be better to have installed on my glasses.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
lolz no don't offer or suggest to show pics to random 54 year old guys on the internet
your face might not be as perfect as you imagine, there is nonzero chance people with that username such as yours might have inflated opinion of themselves.
no big pores, no wrinkles...heh......suuuuure
Does it really have any other purpose? Really?
Honestly it looks like watching 480p upscaled.
If everything was stuck in low def, wouldn't be a "need", but with 1080p, 2k, 4k, 8k, higher definitions make it much easier to "see the flaws". Just get rid of the overhyped "actors" and use CGI. Movies would be easier to make, without the "drama" of the overpaid hollyWEIRD crybabies.
Sounds legit smart.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I think realtime is what's significant here given the frame rates and resolution. That's an impressive amount of computation whereas historically crude analog (blur or special filters on the lens) techniques had to be used if makeup wasn't available or enough.
I made no claims about beauty or lack dummy-tude or talent.
Please read with more comprehension before posting. Better yet, holler up the stairs to your mommy to order you a pizza so you feel better and not so grumpy.
As if the definition of Beauty is not manipulated enough by magazines and digital retouching as it is. :|
Whole generations of folks striving to reach the levels of Beauty their idols achieve, clueless to the fact it is all digitally and / or makeup enhanced bullshit.
Using it in things like political ads, well, that's a different question.
If you're choosing a leader based on their physical attractiveness, you deserve to be disenfranchised.
If this supposed to be a commercial for the software it's a failure. The side-by-side results show an obvious muddy texture on the skin on the after side. If you're entire production is really soft focus, I guess it might blend in, but otherwise it looks like you hired a moron for a video compressionist.
Is this step one in getting us used to accepting the visual uncanny valley (autotune has already done this for audio)? When it gets to the point where we cannot tell the difference between a real actor and an animation on the screen, will Hollywood go the same way as Detroit?
Maybe we can all maintain a facade by webcam? Perfect Tinder date, perfect salesperson or camgirl.... as long as we never meet in the flesh. Think my cyberpunk reading list is coming true!
... CGI-ification of human actors so that, in the future when movie studio profits need a boost, they can get rid of the human actors altogether---by then we won't recognize the difference. There's no Actor's Guild pay scale like no pay at all.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Bubblehead? What the everloving fuck are you talking about. She is freaking awesome.
I agree that she is awesome, and I agree with her on some issues.
But when she talks, listen to the details. Write down the numbers. Then go to Google and do a reality check. Many of the "facts" she rattles off are off by a factor of ten or more. And some of her policy proposals are what destroyed Venezuela. She is reality challenged.
We've actually been doing this for decades, it's called a soft-focus filter, they've been used to make people's faces look better since at least the 1920s. Before that, you just left the lens slightly unfocused. So this is just an expensive GPU-accelerated (and thus hype-attracting) way of doing what you could do with a bit of glass for over a hundred years.
About 10 years ago I was doing photo restoration in a small camera store. I had a large stock of noise/texture patterns to put back into photographs after retouching them so they didn't look too perfect. Even modern retouching tools meant for still photographs don't do that well, so I'm not surprised these "AI" video tools do such a bad job.
Oh great, this will make the girls on this planet even more insecure and boys have even more unrealistic expectations... just what we need :(.. Why cant we all just be ok with who we are exactly as we are? I love technology but this is just adding to a cultural phenomenon that is already pretty sick.
nt
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
old school technology: beer goggles, is likely cheaper
It strikes me that this is related to the pushback against high frame rate movies. Apparently a substantial segment of people like 24fps, because of the "cinematic feel" it gives you. It's an artifact left from a previous age, but some people want to preserve the lack of realism it portrays.
Hiding actors freckles and blemishes is perhaps part of the same mentality. I remember when HDTV first came out: I was struck by the fact that I could actually see the wrinkles and freckles and little blemishes on people's faces. Apparently this is unwanted - too much realism?
It's also probably sheer egotism on the part of Hollywood & Co.. An actor or actress is no one special - they just have a talent for playing pretend in a convincing way. Yet they feel entitled to tell us all about their views on politics and society, and how we should live our lives. They think they know better. They certainly don't want us to see that they are just people with zits and wrinkles, like everyone else - that might dent their mystique.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
it doesn't only work for faces, but the video also shows hands, complete bodies and...
paper.
in the youtube video one person is holding a wrinkled paper and in the 'processed' stream the paper is very much less wrinkled.
i think the whole thing is stupid, if you need to modify people so much, might as well just use complete digital models instead.
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
I want an algorithm that'll take these artificial faces and make them look real again.
I would agree with "bubblehead". It's like they elected a college sophomore who took one poli-sci class and thinks she knows everything. Yes, I'm aware of her alleged degrees.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.