Asus ROG Strix XG27UQ review
be quiet! Pure Rock 2 review
Fractal Design Define 7 Compact review
Lian Li Galahad 360 liquid cooler review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - July 2020
Patriot Viper Steel DDR4 3600 MHz (64GB) review
Red Dead Redemption 2: PC graphics benchmark review (revisited)
Kioxia Exceria 960 GB SATA3 SSD review
HP Portable P500 1TB Portable USB3 SSD review
EK-Quantum Magnitude WaterBlock Review
Apollo 16 Lunar Mission Footage Upscaled To 4K 60 FPS is pretty amazing
Check this Apollo 16 Rover Traverse to Station 4 16mm footage interpolated from 12fps to 60fps with DAIN-AI. Colour corrected and synchronized with audio. This YouTuber took the 16 mm footage shot on the moon back in 1972 and through the magic of artificial intelligence made the quality look like you were right there with them.
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 1946
Joined: 2013-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1946
Joined: 2013-03-10
#5808340 Posted on: 07/13/2020 10:55 AM
It's pretty funny that a computer game these days could produce better moon footage, rendered real time, than authentic recordings from the heydays of the space race.
It's pretty funny that a computer game these days could produce better moon footage, rendered real time, than authentic recordings from the heydays of the space race.
Dribble
Senior Member
Posts: 145
Joined: 2019-01-18
Senior Member
Posts: 145
Joined: 2019-01-18
#5808347 Posted on: 07/13/2020 11:20 AM
Game looks boring, no explosions, no aliens, boring dialog. Not sure about lighting, not enough lens flare, also ground textures looked a bit flat and I thought the shiny reflective thing at the front was a bit ott.
Game looks boring, no explosions, no aliens, boring dialog. Not sure about lighting, not enough lens flare, also ground textures looked a bit flat and I thought the shiny reflective thing at the front was a bit ott.
wavetrex
Senior Member
Posts: 1058
Joined: 2008-07-16
Senior Member
Posts: 1058
Joined: 2008-07-16
#5808360 Posted on: 07/13/2020 12:22 PM
For all those commenting about how bad the footage is... I'm sure your handy-cams back in the 60s were much better.
... oh wait.
For all those commenting about how bad the footage is... I'm sure your handy-cams back in the 60s were much better.
... oh wait.
NewTRUMP Order
Senior Member
Posts: 466
Joined: 2017-02-04
Senior Member
Posts: 466
Joined: 2017-02-04
#5808411 Posted on: 07/13/2020 02:47 PM
Before the the proof reader police start with their smarter than thou nonsense, no Apollo 16 did not go to Mars. Yeah it's an error get over it. Moving on....What I find amazing is no one comments on how we actually, yes we did there is equipment on the moon that is still being used to measure the moon pulling away from the earth, went to the moon 50 something years ago! They should have made a split screen side by side with the original footage so you could appreciate the upscaling.
Before the the proof reader police start with their smarter than thou nonsense, no Apollo 16 did not go to Mars. Yeah it's an error get over it. Moving on....What I find amazing is no one comments on how we actually, yes we did there is equipment on the moon that is still being used to measure the moon pulling away from the earth, went to the moon 50 something years ago! They should have made a split screen side by side with the original footage so you could appreciate the upscaling.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 10517
Joined: 2012-07-20
It is not bad, but it is not that much better than motion vector being cut in 5 parts to produce fluid image. They just take 2 consecutive (original) motion vectors and turn them into spline before cutting.
Image is not really 4K. More like 960x640 as no IQ is lost between 1080p and 720p, but there is some loss of IQ going 480p. It is nice for given resolution nonetheless.