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.

12 of 138 comments (clear)

  1. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  2. Won't 4k kill this for a while? by wonkavader · · Score: 3, Funny

    "The question...is whether the technology creates an unrealistic expectation of having"
    blurry, featureless skin.

    1. Re: Won't 4k kill this for a while? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      So we've gone full circle, we have invented SD video

  3. Re:Probably not. by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  4. The problem... by mholve · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:The problem... by geekmux · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      Let's be realistic here. Any amount of digital manipulation isn't going to change the shock value once you meet the actor or actress in meatspace. They're all going to look different/look older/look like shit by comparison.

      And the fact that photo manipulation is still alive and well after decades tells you the popularity in which video manipulation will be welcomed with open arms. The world is full of lies, and people love it.

  5. Fucking stupid by reanjr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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?

    1. Re:Fucking stupid by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...or maybe they should stop using blur filters because it is fine to see actors and actresses with a few wrinkles. However, I don't think this is a blur filter because otherwise, it will look terrible on a big movie screen where it is intended to be used.

    2. Re:Fucking stupid by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

      What's the point of high res capture if you're just going to muddy the image in post processing?

      In photography, the basic algorithm is to use a high-pass filter to identify high-contrast regions (places with lots of edges. Turn that into a mask and invert it. Apply a blurring algorithm to the picture, using the mask to exempt the high-contrast parts of the pic (places with lots of edges.) The final result is a pic where low-contrast surfaces (like skin and sky and blurred backgrounds) are blurred, but high-contrast edges which contain detail are untouched.

      I never liked doing it (I prefer realistic photos), but it was sometimes necessary to counter a sharpening algorithm run across the entire picture, and prevent skin blemishes from being exaggerated. Also, I found that if I first showed my female friends their photo after running it through the above algorithm, they were much less likely to threaten to kill me if I ever released that photo to the public. Who says flattery never got you anywhere?

  6. Nothing new here by petes_PoV · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  7. Should be banned for beauty commercials by ET3D · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  8. When making a video of your product by quonset · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.