It had a focus recovery feature but it is global and only work with super HD images by dropping resolution weirdly.
It looks normal in the original. The lack of resolution is just a combo of the original transfer, the settings of the dude/tte that uploaded it and youtube compression.
It just doesnât look natural to moi cuz of the weird sharpening of things that shouldnât be sharpened.
1 Like
Photoshop has an AI feature that allows you to create a depth map which can then be used as a mask to control blur. Itâs not perfect, yet, but itâs pretty decent.
Hereâs a comparison of the original and the depth mask.
1 Like
I do it like I like it. I suppose if you got really anal about it you could break each scene apart and run filters for it but that would stretch for days. No way! Unless undiscovered cziff footage maybe.
Oh, if this is what you were going for, than you did a great jobâŚlooks good.
I try to keep the hands looking good. AI does ultra weird stuff in the deep frame. Before I pushed it back to black and white it gave everybody blue eyes
#racism
He play so much with wrist. I wonder if that how he do young too?
Sadly melo still holding onto the private video cap of da 
improing for da Nazi officers 
1 Like
Ruby was right: Pad was a marvelous personality.
He draws you in with his charisma and gravitas in this perf.
1 Like
Crazy to think if someone really wanted to and had access to analog source they could probably put out a 2k resolution version of this stuff fully restored. Film resolution back then heaps better than people realize and these just DVD source souffles.
Absolutely. Just look at films from the 30s and 40s on streamingâŚthey look great.
You just need a competent transfer of the original 35mm film (unless this was shot on 16mm).
1 Like
4k isnât that much resolution. Itâs just 8 megapixels.
1 Like
resolution of good negative film stock is approx. 4K - certainly the stuff from the 20s-50s.
Things got crappier and crappier as film got cheaper and had more mass availability (capitalizm). especially duplication - from the late 60s on, a lot of stuff was duped at high speed which led to blurring and poor chroma. Sum stuff still good tho (any kubrick for example), but you had to have a director/producer who cared about that and had enough clout to make the studios swallow the extra cost.
TL;DR
original 20s-50s stuff is stunningly good
50s-80s stuff can still be good if you go back to negatives or 1st gen prints
1 Like
Whatâs the resolution of those few films that were shot in 65mm?
â65mm film is equivalent to a 12K resolution, and IMAX 65mm film is equivalent to 18K resolutionâ
Daim
1 Like
around 16K i reckon. iâve not had the chance to work with 70mm.
1 Like
About 16 HP 
Damn!
Youâve done work in film restoration ?
A little. Mostly just projection work back in the last century.
2 Likes