VideoHelp Forum

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4
FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 95
Thread
  1. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Oh, I know, and I don't disparage their work. On the contrary, I think they have done great things and will do more great things. And as I said, I use many of those tools. But 40+ years' work is still early on in the journey and it is prudent to take all these gains with a grain of salt. That's all I have been saying.


    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  2. DECEASED
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Heaven
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    ..........
    Very smart people have been working doggedly at machine translation and natural language processing for more than 40 years to get that far.
    (I met someone working in that area about 40 years ago.)
    Evidently those guys are not smart enough.
    If they were, they themselves would have already stopped saying things like "natural languages".
    ALL languages spoken by earthlings are artificial, spoken languages are built and rebuilt by actual people every day.
    They are not fruits on a tree
    "Programmers are human-shaped machines that transform alcohol into bugs."
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by El Heggunte View Post
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    ..........
    Very smart people have been working doggedly at machine translation and natural language processing for more than 40 years to get that far.
    (I met someone working in that area about 40 years ago.)
    Evidently those guys are not smart enough.
    If they were, they themselves would have already stopped saying things like "natural languages".
    ALL languages spoken by earthlings are artificial, spoken languages are built and rebuilt by actual people every day.
    They are not fruits on a tree
    If you had looked it up, you would find "natural language" means how most people normally speak -- using imperfect grammar, poorly constructed sentences, slang, and words/definitions restricted to certain regions.
    Last edited by usually_quiet; 24th Mar 2023 at 00:13.
    Ignore list: hello_hello, tried, TechLord, Snoopy329
    Quote Quote  
  4. Some might find this interesting, but AviDemux now features AI up scaling in it's nightly builds.
    Quote Quote  
  5. "AI up scaling" any details on what 'ai' method is used,..?
    users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555
    Quote Quote  
  6. Thanks for the info.
    users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555
    Quote Quote  
  7. Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    If you had looked it up, you would find "natural language" means how most people normally speak -- using imperfect grammar, poorly constructed sentences, slang, and words/definitions restricted to certain regions.
    Nothing drives me nuts more than "natural language". Its infuriating hearing people say "was" instead of "were". Or "Watch what he do" instead of "does". And no one seems to care about it. English is not my native language, but I try my best to use proper grammar and stuff like that.

    Thanks.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Plehoediv
    Nothing drives me nuts more than "natural language". Its infuriating hearing people say "was" instead of "were". Or "Watch what he do" instead of "does". And no one seems to care about it. English is not my native language, but I try my best to use proper grammar and stuff like that.
    I admire you putting in the effort. Increasingly, people can't write proper English.
    Quote Quote  
  9. English is not my native language either.
    Originally Posted by plehoediv View Post
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    If you had looked it up, you would find have found "natural language" means meant how most people normally speak -- using imperfect grammar, poorly constructed sentences, slang, and words/definitions restricted to certain regions.
    Nothing drives me nuts more than "natural language". Its It's infuriating hearing people say "was" instead of "were". Or "Watch what he do" instead of "does". And no one seems to care about it. English is not my native language, but I try my best to use proper grammar and stuff like that.

    Thanks.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by plehoediv View Post
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    If you had looked it up, you would find "natural language" means how most people normally speak -- using imperfect grammar, poorly constructed sentences, slang, and words/definitions restricted to certain regions.
    Nothing drives me nuts more than "natural language". Its infuriating hearing people say "was" instead of "were". Or "Watch what he do" instead of "does". And no one seems to care about it. English is not my native language, but I try my best to use proper grammar and stuff like that.

    Thanks.
    Well this is going to blow your mind.

    There are times when it is grammatical to say "if I was" (indicative) and other times where it is grammatical to say "if I were" (subjunctive). Similarly "were I to watch what he do..." is correct in the subjunctive. So a lot depends on the context.
    And then there is the whole "language is constantly evolving" idea, so as much as it may bother some (often including me), it probably isn't worth it to get too worked up about it - as long as the meaning is still clear.
    Ok, I know that went off-topic.

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Bwaak View Post
    English is not my native language either.
    Originally Posted by plehoediv View Post
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    If you had looked it up, you would find have found "natural language" means meant how most people normally speak -- using imperfect grammar, poorly constructed sentences, slang, and words/definitions restricted to certain regions.
    Nothing drives me nuts more than "natural language". Its It's infuriating hearing people say "was" instead of "were". Or "Watch what he do" instead of "does". And no one seems to care about it. English is not my native language, but I try my best to use proper grammar and stuff like that.

    Thanks.
    You are partly right. It is true that I should have used the conditional past tense "would have found".

    However, using the past tense, "meant", implies that either the definition I gave for "natural language" has changed or that the term "natural language" itself is obsolete. Using "means" indicates that the definition I gave and the term "natural language" are still current.
    Last edited by usually_quiet; 25th Mar 2023 at 12:04. Reason: typo
    Ignore list: hello_hello, tried, TechLord, Snoopy329
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    Similarly "were I to watch what he do..." is correct in the subjunctive.
    Not in English it's not!
    Quote Quote  
  13. Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    Originally Posted by Plehoediv
    Nothing drives me nuts more than "natural language". Its infuriating hearing people say "was" instead of "were". Or "Watch what he do" instead of "does". And no one seems to care about it. English is not my native language, but I try my best to use proper grammar and stuff like that.
    I admire you putting in the effort. Increasingly, people can't write proper English.
    Thank you...
    Quote Quote  
  14. Originally Posted by Bwaak View Post
    English is not my native language either.
    Originally Posted by plehoediv View Post
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    If you had looked it up, you would find have found "natural language" means meant how most people normally speak -- using imperfect grammar, poorly constructed sentences, slang, and words/definitions restricted to certain regions.
    Nothing drives me nuts more than "natural language". Its It's infuriating hearing people say "was" instead of "were". Or "Watch what he do" instead of "does". And no one seems to care about it. English is not my native language, but I try my best to use proper grammar and stuff like that.

    Thanks.
    You are doing great!
    Quote Quote  
  15. I think that in some cases the machine learning is a better method (with, of course, the avisynth improved footage). Of course it's not a wide usage spectrum but it does exist
    Quote Quote  
  16. Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    Originally Posted by plehoediv View Post
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    If you had looked it up, you would find "natural language" means how most people normally speak -- using imperfect grammar, poorly constructed sentences, slang, and words/definitions restricted to certain regions.
    Nothing drives me nuts more than "natural language". Its infuriating hearing people say "was" instead of "were". Or "Watch what he do" instead of "does". And no one seems to care about it. English is not my native language, but I try my best to use proper grammar and stuff like that.

    Thanks.
    Well this is going to blow your mind.

    There are times when it is grammatical to say "if I was" (indicative) and other times where it is grammatical to say "if I were" (subjunctive). Similarly "were I to watch what he do..." is correct in the subjunctive. So a lot depends on the context.
    And then there is the whole "language is constantly evolving" idea, so as much as it may bother some (often including me), it probably isn't worth it to get too worked up about it - as long as the meaning is still clear.
    Ok, I know that went off-topic.

    Scott
    Scott, I am sure you are right. However, I am talking about the times where you "know" it's just wrong. For example:

    "I aint got no time for that."

    This sentence contains several grammatical errors. "Aint" is not a standard English word and is a nonstandard contraction of "am not" or "are not". "Got no" is also nonstandard, as the correct phrase is "do not have" or "have no". Finally, "no time for that" should be "any time for that" as the former is a double negative and considered incorrect in standard English.

    A correct version of this sentence would be: "I don't have any time for that."

    Thanks ChatGPT, ha ha.

    Having said, my grammar is 100% not correct all the time. Just use the last sentence. Maybe, "My grammar is 100% of the time not correct." would've been better?
    We obviously do not talk like we did a few hundred years ago, but it has nothing to do with "language is constantly evolving". To me, it is deteriorating, not evolving.

    Anyhow, it is what it is.

    Thanks.

    P.S. Since I am the "thread starter" I approve of you/us going off-topic, ha ha.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Scott, I am sure you are right. However, I am talking about the times where you "know" it's just wrong. For example:

    "I aint got no time for that."

    This sentence contains several grammatical errors. "Aint" is not a standard English word and is a nonstandard contraction of "am not" or "are not". "Got no" is also nonstandard, as the correct phrase is "do not have" or "have no". Finally, "no time for that" should be "any time for that" as the former is a double negative and considered incorrect in standard English.

    A correct version of this sentence would be: "I don't have any time for that."

    Thanks ChatGPT, ha ha.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ain%27t_Nobody_Got_Time_for_That
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by plehoediv
    Having said, my grammar is 100% not correct all the time. Just use the last sentence. Maybe, "My grammar is 100% of the time not correct." would've been better?
    Nope! "My grammar is not 100% correct all of the time".

    We obviously do not talk like we did a few hundred years ago, but it has nothing to do with "language is constantly evolving". To me, it is deteriorating, not evolving.
    Couldn't agree more, exacerbated by the butchering English receives from those on the west side of "the pond".

    My current pet hate, now infiltrating our journos, is, instead of "it is likely that the economy will crash", is "the economy will likely crash". Arrghh!

    As for AI AVISynth, I will stick with AI Neat Video thanks!
    Last edited by Alwyn; 26th Mar 2023 at 07:54. Reason: Spelling! :)
    Quote Quote  
  19. [QUOTE=Alwyn;2685314]
    Originally Posted by plehoediv
    Having said, my grammar is 100% not correct all the time. Just use the last sentence. Maybe, "My grammar is 100% of the time not correct." would've been better?
    Nope! "My grammar is not 100% correct all of the time".
    LOL. Thanks. Do I get an A?

    We obviously do not talk like we did a few hundred years ago, but it has nothing to do with "language is constantly evolving". To me, it is deteriorating, not evolving.
    Couldn't agree more, exacerbated by the butchering English receives from those on the west side of "the pond".
    Thanks. I lived "over there" for a while and let me tell you... nah, let's not.

    My current pet hate, now infiltrating our journos, is, instead of "it is likely that the economy will crash", is "the economy will likely crash". Arrghh!


    As for AI AVISynth, I will stick with AI Neat Video thanks!
    Just downloaded the plugin and will give it try later.

    Thanks.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Originally Posted by s-mp View Post
    Scott, I am sure you are right. However, I am talking about the times where you "know" it's just wrong. For example:

    "I aint got no time for that."

    This sentence contains several grammatical errors. "Aint" is not a standard English word and is a nonstandard contraction of "am not" or "are not". "Got no" is also nonstandard, as the correct phrase is "do not have" or "have no". Finally, "no time for that" should be "any time for that" as the former is a double negative and considered incorrect in standard English.

    A correct version of this sentence would be: "I don't have any time for that."

    Thanks ChatGPT, ha ha.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ain%27t_Nobody_Got_Time_for_That
    Thank you, "Sweet Brown", for that, ha ha.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by plehoediv View Post
    I do not call this AI, but still find it amazing.

    https://www.tiktok.com/@rebeccashepardstudios/video/7202095586625981742

    Thanks.
    Whoa. Yep, amazing how filters now work.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    Originally Posted by plehoediv View Post
    I do not call this AI, but still find it amazing.

    https://www.tiktok.com/@rebeccashepardstudios/video/7202095586625981742

    Thanks.
    Whoa. Yep, amazing how filters now work.
    Without wanting to bombard the thread with TikTok videos, but you "have" to see this one.

    https://www.tiktok.com/@zhangsta/video/7205822453401128234?lang=de-DE&q=glamour%20filt...=1679843616317
    Quote Quote  
  23. Ehm, .., Is gramma nazi gone?

    Yeah, it is all sorts of categories, just slight denoise, hard denoise, or just removing bits that are considered wrong to be there, or slight change to original, then models with pattern changes to pronounce them and now even overall reconstructive changes. Everything is mixed together in this thread.
    Quote Quote  
  24. DECEASED
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Heaven
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by _Al_ View Post
    Everything is mixed together in this thread.
    But of course. The name of the topic is
    "When is AI going to make everything else obsolete?"
    "Programmers are human-shaped machines that transform alcohol into bugs."
    Quote Quote  
  25. Yes, op uses a word AI, which is a synonym for whatever makes it better. But you HAVE TO categorize it. You cannot run old TV show or VHS home video run thru with the same software that fixes faces like in that last link.

    Answer for op question is yes, the longer he waits , the better results he gets, but that does not mean that he would not denoise VHS tapes and not watch it. It has nothing to do with a mystery AI lurking in the shadows.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Originally Posted by _Al_ View Post
    Ehm, .., Is gramma nazi gone?
    A bit harsh, don't you think?

    Yeah, it is all sorts of categories, just slight denoise, hard denoise, or just removing bits that are considered wrong to be there, or slight change to original, then models with pattern changes to pronounce them and now even overall reconstructive changes.
    I am not following...

    Everything is mixed together in this thread.
    So.
    Quote Quote  
  27. Originally Posted by El Heggunte View Post
    Originally Posted by _Al_ View Post
    Everything is mixed together in this thread.
    But of course. The name of the topic is
    "When is AI going to make everything else obsolete?"
    And your point is?
    Quote Quote  
  28. Originally Posted by _Al_ View Post
    Yes, op uses a word AI, which is a synonym for whatever makes it better. But you HAVE TO categorize it. You cannot run old TV show or VHS home video run thru with the same software that fixes faces like in that last link.
    Like I said, I should have used a different word other than AI, but it's too late now. . I also agree with what you said. You cannot expect one software to do it all.

    Answer for op question is yes, the longer he waits , the better results he gets,
    Correct. Time is working in my favor.

    but that does not mean that he would not denoise VHS tapes and not watch it. It has nothing to do with a mystery AI lurking in the shadows.
    I agree.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads