This is awesome. It also brought back some anxiety from >10 years ago in college that reminds me that computer graphics and my brain do not agree whatsoever.
I read somewhere that CPUs are better at generating graphics than GPUs (although I imagine much slower). Is that true? Does that explain why GUI libraries like Egui are so much uglier than, for example, Iced?
I wonder if they'll ever start doing the graphics with AI.
Could you render the scene in the simplest most efficient way possible, then train a special model that takes that picture, along with the coordinates of lights, depth maps, text descriptions of materials, etc, and adds detail?
They're pretty much just upscaling and interpolating right? They can't fill in anything that's not actually there, like you could with a model that understands "Hey this tree is a actually just a PS2 era low poly model, but here's a picture of what it should look like, make it fit somehow"
21 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 46.4 ms ] threadNot as technicial but similarly cool.
These friends don't get it!
Anyway, I think you should change friends. Or study subjects. Either way.
Btw, these look like parasites or worms under microscope.
Could you render the scene in the simplest most efficient way possible, then train a special model that takes that picture, along with the coordinates of lights, depth maps, text descriptions of materials, etc, and adds detail?
DLSS - Render at low resolution, use an ML model to upscale
Frame Gen - Render a frame, use an ML model to generate the next frame. Render the next, gen the next....so on
(I think in practice, Frame Gen is more complicated due to fluctuation between FPS but that's another can of worms)