• booly
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    4 months ago

    I still think it’s bullshit that 20-year-old photos now look the same as 20-second-old photos. Young people out there with baby pictures that look like they were taken yesterday.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        The tradition has normally been to just have newer image formats and image-generation hardware and software that are more capable or higher fidelity so that the old stuff starts to look old in comparison to the new stuff.

        • FierySpectre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          What should be done is that every time a new format comes out all images in existence are re-encoded in that format. Hopefully that will cause artifacts, clearing everything up in terms of image age.

          • mwguy@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            Slight tangent. But I’ve recently been pulling old home videos off of MiniDV tapes. And I’ve found that the ffmpeg dv1 decoder can correct several tape issues when re-encoding from dv1 to essentially any modern codec. So I’ve got like 3GB video files that look incredibly poor, but then I re-encode them into h264 files that look better than the original. It’s baffling how well that works.

      • III@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Could probably pull that off with meta information to determine the age of the photo.

    • mindbleach
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Your film didn’t age, the past was just browner.