The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
Resolve to be sharper: Intel’s new algorithm, which leverages multicore architecture, can improve the resolution of video in real time.
Technology Review
Software for multicore computers could add resolution to video in real time.
Researchers at Intel have developed an algorithm that, by leveraging the power of multiple microprocessors, can boost the resolution of a video as it plays in real time. The technology, called super resolution, can run on machines with as few as two cores and as many as hundreds, potentially letting people enhance video captured with a cheap webcam, improve old home movies, or turn a DVD-quality video into a high-resolution flick.
Intel's super-resolution research is part of the company's push to find the best applications to run on its multicore machines, says Jerry Bautista, codirector of Intel's tera-scale computing research program. While multicore computers--machines with more than one processing core--are currently available to consumers in dual- and quad-core varieties, Intel has a research-grade microprocessor with 80 cores. (See "The Promise of Personal Supercomputing.") And as researchers get closer to their goal of achieving tera-scale computing on desktop computers--in which trillions of calculations per second are enabled by massively multicore systems--the company is ramping up its software research; improving video quality using multicore machines is one of the top priorities on Intel's to-do list, says Bautista.
To be sure, the chip maker isn't the first to explore the idea of adding resolution to video. Super-resolution theory dates back to the 1980s, says Peyman Milanfar, a professor of electrical engineering at the University of California, Santa Cruz. But in the early days, the algorithms just didn't work well, and the computing power wasn't there to process the videos quickly. In 2003, Milanfar and his group developed computationally efficient algorithms that were able to improve the resolution for most video, although not in real time. Indeed, Milanfar's approach has been the basis of other research by academics and companies.
Super-resolution algorithms upgrade video in two main steps, explains Oscar Nestares, senior research scientist at Intel. First, the algorithm examines pixels in the video frames to see how fast each pixel is moving and in which direction. For instance, if a car is moving down a street, the pixels that compose it will all be moving in a predictable way.
The data collected in the first step is then used to estimate the movement of new pixels that are added to increase the video resolution. The result is a cleaner video that appears to be captured at the same time as the original. "We're trying to get information that's not there between frames," says Intel's Bautista. "The only way we can do this is if we collect lots of data and make better educated guesses at what those intermediate pixels should be."
Bautista explains that one thing that differentiates Intel's super-resolution algorithm from others is its ability, in real time, to generate what's known as a robust result. This means that the algorithm is able to toss out any erroneous pixels that could be a result of electrical noise in the sensor or dust on the lens, for instance. These erroneous pixels tend to lead to inaccurate guesses and a video that isn't true to reality.
Other super-resolution solutions
Nothing new. Just google a bit and you'll see that this super resolution technology already exists as an Adobe After Affects and Premiere Pro plug-in and also as a stand-alone Windows application. It actively uses multiple cores too and works much faster (320x240 -> 640x480 with 20 fps on a quad core).
http://www.thedeemon.com/super_resolution/
http://www.thedeemon.com/VideoEnhancer/
Found something from CNBC about super-resolution in the film industry. Looks like all the indie filmmakers are doing backflips now.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/23954891/
The company's called Topaz Labs. www.topazlabs.com . They make some bold claims.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
This document is part of the “How-To Guide for Most Common Measurements” centralized resource portal. This tutorial provides a detailed guide for measurement and device considerations to take temperature measurements using thermocouples. Get an introduction to thermocouples, which are inexpensive sensing devices widely used with PC-based data acquisition systems. Also review some specific thermocouple examples and learn how thermocouples work and ways to integrate them into a data acquisition measurement system.
View full PDF >Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
inboulder
10 Comments
Nice article, poor presentation
The video on this site of the upscaling in question is so small as to be useless. This is especially ironic considering the content of this article. Did Tech Rev contemplate this issue before publishing?
Reply
Mr.Doerr
1 Comment
Re: Nice article, poor presentation
I'm sorry that you did not see the difference in the video, which by the way was clearly visible. The idea was to show you an example, not to market the product.
Reply
3danim8
1 Comment
Re: Nice article, poor presentation
Not only was the video in the left and right panels indistinguishable, the text that described the video panels was also in error. It stated: "The original video, on the left, was captured with a standard USB 2.0 webcam with an input of 160 by 120 pixels. The output on the left is 320 by 240 pixels."
Should the description read: "output on the right..."
Reply
brunascle
65 Comments
Re: Nice article, poor presentation
i agree. at this scale it's hard to make a judgement. i can see a difference between the two, but i wouldnt call the one on the right _better_, just different. the one on the left is blurry, the one on the right is blocky. and they're both equally legible, at least IMO.
and judging the result by the resolution you're able to achieve is totally meaningless. i can put a video into whatever resolution i want simply by filling in random pixels, or upscaling. the only way to judge it is to either compare it to an original taken at the same resolution, or by human perception.
Reply
GaryB
119 Comments
Re: Nice article, poor presentation
While I agree that say an 85 year old would see no difference in these videos, those of us who are younger and retain some visual acuity can quite clearly read the text better on the right than on the left.
I'd like to see this work on non-text, say a sports clip with near/play far/crowd differences. Or better yet, a youtube clip which have just awful resolution and terrible compression artifacts. But, as is, it's pretty cool work.
Reply
mem11363
1 Comment
Re: Nice article, poor presentation
I believe the original video steadily cycles from clear to blurry to clear. This is consistent with what I have experienced with webcams when the amount of motion in the input stream exceeds their processing capability. The "enhanced" video remains clear. So this demonstration tells me that the algorithm is successful at determining the clarity of each frame it processes and uses the better ones - ignores or puts a lower weight on the worse ones. But that seems like a different goal than taking a good quality video at resolution X (like a high quality dvd) and converting it to a high quality video at say double or quadruple the initial resolution.
Reply