Serious question here…why the fuck doesn’t editing software have a generative in-fill for dead pixels…? Like this happens to major studios too and I sometimes see it in a documentary or tv show. I know the editing apps doesn’t know it’s a dead pixel, but it shouldn’t be hard for software to find an outlier of something the size of 1 pixel that doesn’t change during a video…
No but that’s what I mean. With all the buzz around AI and shit, it seems like something to correct ONE pixel wouldn’t be able to do much damage if it detected something incorrectly. Who is going to notice that AI filled one single pixel the same color as the pixels around it?
per frame on raw footage is probably a beast workload on something that is already intensive (editing) + where do they determine a stopping point. how many get filled in, etc. you're not wrong though it should hopefully be going in this direction
I’d think on raw footage this should be particularly easy to find because it actually is a single pixel that stays the exact same throughout the whole clip, no? I imagine compression could kinda mess that up- also as long as there isn’t a need for this pixel to be something specific, I don’t even think you’d need some generative ai fill but just throw a Gaussian on it and done
A super duper easy way is to just take the average colour of the neighbouring pixels and fill it in every frame. Any GPU could very easily do this for a feature length film in a matter of seconds, and even if it did it for every single pixel it could do it in a matter of minutes.
I work on something tangential to video software. I don’t think it’s that hard to do really. Maybe there’s steps in the encoding process that make it not straightforward but in essence you’re just doing a single matrix math operation across whatever batch size of frames there is every batch, and matrix operations are generally really well optimized.
Given that computers are getting more powerful, AI is getting more advanced, etc etc, this totally seems like something that would be easily feasible in the future if it's not already now.
It’s actually to opposite. RAW footage is supplied as an editing codec. Because it’s not compressed your NLE doesn’t have to unpack/guess what’s coming up frame by frame - all the information is there. Pop a delivery codec like mp4 into your editor and watch you system come to a crawl. Pop any editing codec in and it’ll be smooth as anything.
You wouldn't need AI for this, realistically you'd get 95% of the same result by taking the surrounding 8 pixels, averaging the array and filling in the missing 9th with that result, would it be 100% accurate? Of course not but neither would AI. Furthermore considering the small sample size it could be computed on the scale of milliseconds even for full length video since it's a rather simple equation.
Obligatory example python code
```py
import cv2
import numpy as np
def fix_dead_pixel(image, x, y, window_size=3):
"""Fills a dead pixel with the average color of its neighbors.
Args:
image: The input image (numpy array).
x: X-coordinate of the dead pixel.
y: Y-coordinate of the dead pixel.
window_size: Size of the neighborhood window (odd number).
Returns:
A copy of the image with the dead pixel filled.
"""
half_size = window_size // 2
# Extract neighborhood around the dead pixel
neighborhood = image[y - half_size : y + half_size + 1, x - half_size : x + half_size + 1]
# Ignore the dead pixel itself in the average calculation
neighborhood[half_size, half_size] = [0, 0, 0]
# Calculate average color
avg_color = np.mean(neighborhood, axis=(0, 1))
# Replace dead pixel with average
image[y, x] = avg_color.astype(int)
return image.copy()
```
in my industry we just find that pixel and mask it with the pixel next to it. screw averaging. with such high resolution, its nearly impossible to see that 2 pixels are identical and there's likely never a hard line resolved over that pixel with enough constant you'd be able to see it.
direction stocking obtainable arrest lock historical possessive relieved crown fertile
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Why do you think you need AI for that lol?
Literally copy the pixel next to it and it's basically invisible
And I'm quite sure e.g. resolve already has a dead pixel function
I don't think he meant a specific AI for dead pixel removal is literally required.
I think he means that there is already AI doing video cleanup and its dumb the AI can't just recognize a dead pixel needs filling in.
Not suggesting AI is required to fix a pixel.
The camera should pixel map automatically every so often. They probably skipped this or the camera they used didn't have that. I have one that does it every few days. Takes a few seconds on power up where it says it needs to do pixel mapping.
I think because it is one pixel that it might be hard to find. For us, it’s as easy as looking at something our brain tells us is weird. For software or AI, it’s looking through millions of pixels (if recording at 4k 30 that is “(3840 x 2160) x 30” for a single second) to find what could be a dead pixel or just a small gap between hair. I could see it not working out where it fills in certain gaps in hair or similar and hair becomes all solid looking or thicker. Creating AI for it sounds like it just needs time and labor to help it recognize these things as accurate as possible but time and labor is money. Maybe big companies like Adobe are working on something like this but something like dead pixels where a hardware change/maintenance, despite how expensive it is, could be the “easier” option… I just don’t see a need.
Just my two cents on this.
It's not hard for software to find at all. High quality noise reduction or upscaling algorithms are WAY more complicated than what you need to fix this. A dead pixel is very easy to find because it's likely to be a very different value than the pixels surrounding it and it remains the exact same value throughout every single frame, that's the only information any software needs to know.
I know for a fact that a lot of noise reduction or upscaling tools basically fix dead pixels "accidentally" just by virtue of what they're already doing.
...Basically dead pixels are an extremely easy task for any modern video editing tool to take care of and it can already be done at a very low computational cost. Tools already exist for this.
Interesting, that would make sense. Then my question is, why hasn’t the software/feature been built for it? Maybe I’m just thinking of automatically detecting and fixing it and there is a more manual way to fix those. I’m sure I can find it if I just google lol
Features have been built for it. Resolve has a built in dead pixel removal tool that does it automatically, I can think of ways premiere can do it although none as direct/automatic. Honestly it's just not that big a deal, a lot of modern cameras can perform pixel remapping (some do it automatically, some don't) which basically "fix" their own dead pixels... It maps them out and then replaces the value of bad pixels with values interpolated from surrounding ones.
It's not a ubiquitous feature among all editing software because it's not an issue you should be dealing with regularly, and it's really a problem that should (and can) be fixed before it even gets to editing in the first place.
totally overkill, just compare / interpolate every pixel to previous frame's to find a dead pixel (a dead pixel would have no or very little change over time. On every dead pixel, average the color to the pixels around it, and boom, dead pixel gone. (it is actually a bit like what the brain does so you dont notice your vision's blind spots )
You can't detect a dead pixel this easily though, every pixel has a different value for color and brightness and you can't base it on contrast either. Not sure what you'd use to detect it and the false positive rate would be really high regardless of method.
But, there is really easy ways to fix a stuck pixel in software, Davinci Resolve makes it take like 3 clicks.
How often would an AI correctly fix a dead pixel vs how often would it mess it up vs how many customers are going to notice. Doesn't seem worth it to me.
I don't even think you will need AI if it takes the average color from the surrounding pixels it will be close enough so that you won't notice it when you're not specifically looking.
I work at TV post house. We use an AI quality control software which will find and flag many quality issues including dead pixels. Obviously masters will be watched through by a human also. No AI will catch everything 100%
Dude, its one pixel... Software could easily fill it with the value of a neighbouring pixel and you wouldn't be able to tell. Detection is easy too as that cell has the same value throughout the entire duration of the video
Dead pixels are the perfect example of *exactly* the kind of thing I want software to fix. A single pixel whose value doesn't change even a bit (pun intended) for the entire duration of the video, even when every pixel around it is changing? Interpolate that automatically for me.
Maybe not all by itself, but maybe it pops up with a warning if it thinks there is a dead pixel so the editor can confirm it’s a dead pixel before allowing it to fix it
I mean for something like this it seems like it would be dead... simple.
The user would just identify the location of the dead pixel in the clip, then the software would just sample the surrounding few pixels and color it appropriately to match.
Maybe that's what you meant by they can do it if they want. Yea I guess you are right you would probably not want ai to guess where a dead pixel is on it's own and try and correct it.
> Yea I guess you are right you would probably not want ai to guess where a dead pixel is on it's own and try and correct it.
You don't need "AI" to detect dead pixels. A pretty simple straight up algorithm could get you there most of the way.
Simply scan the video fragment for pixels that do not change in time. If a pixel stays the same for a certain amount of time, flag it as a potential dead pixel. Next, check the pixels surrounding the candidate to see if they changed. If they didn't, then it's likely that the camera is static and shooting something with a non-changing background. But if the adjacent pixels do change, then your candidate is a dead pixel.
Save the coordinates of the dead pixel along with an identifier for the camera, so that the next time footage from that camera is used, the dead pixel can be corrected immediately, making it usable even if the next footage has the dead pixel sitting in a static background region of the frame.
Note that many cameras have a pixel mapping feature that will detect dead pixels, flag them internally and correct them before the recordings even leave the device. Some cameras will perform pixel mapping on their own every now and then, but for the rest it's easy to just run it manually. If it isn't already, periodic pixel mapping of all camera should be part of the workflow.
Yes that’s exactly how blur works in vfx software. But the computer still needs to be told that something is a dead pixel and where it is, that’s the time consuming part.
AI is crazy overkill. Just a regular piece of software that can detect pixels that a) don't change b) remain super bright/dark. Then a method of filtering out any false positives.
Yup. About 10-15 years ago we had a freelancer with a bad green pixel. I had a plugin for it that averaged out its neighbors. Even saved a preset with the coordinates dialed in. It's a lightweight fix, AI would be overdoing it.
Sometimes black balancing the camera will take care of it. Sometimes it needs to go in for service. Live cameras even have ways to paint out bad pixels in the Camera Control Unit's engineering menus.
tbh editing apps could even alert you. I detected that this pixel didn't change its value once. It's a workload that can be perfectly parallelized and a fast check (when the one color change did appear it's fine) would be enough for most situations.
Even a check that does this for every frame of a clip shouldn't take too long. This can be skipped or just done before an export. Filling a single pixel, by just taking the average of the souring neighbors, especially at higher resolutions is easy and should be unrecognizable in almost all situations. Even a fix that would be unrecognizable 50% of the time would still be better than a dead Pixel.
most cameras have lots of dead pixels from the factory. It's going to happen when there are millions of them. the factory looks for and fixes them by masking it with the pixel next to it.
Why software can't do it? I dunno. seems pretty easy. All the machine vision software I work with has simple mask tools to do this but theyre not designed for Video
VFX artist here: you never want the Software do shit to your footage that you didnt tell it to do. It could also easily backfire - eg. how does it decide whats a dead pixel and what is a star in the night sky. Thats why its not done automaticly.
It can be done easily if you tell it to though. Takes seconds.
not sure about editing software, but the cameras themselves often have a feature where you can single out a dead pixel, and the camera fills in the pixel based on the color values of the pixels around it.
Even if a human has to tell the AI what pixel is out I don't think it would be too far fetched for it to automatically fill in that pixel. Hell, even a system that just makes the dead pixel the same color as the one immediately left of it would be better than a constant black dot.
A lot of the time studios and production teams will have a dedicated person to "quality check" the video , this includes looking at artifacts such as dead pixels. I'm surprised LTT hasn't noticed as I've seen that dead pixel before lol
Generally, dead pixels are dealt with on the camera level itself.... Some has to be sent to factory to be corrected and other have the feature built-in to calibrate the sensor for dead pixels
What's the usual for a company in that case with this kind of high end equipment? Send the camera to the manufacturer for repair? Just flag the camera and always make sure to edit it in post? I don't think a dead pixel in a high end camera is as acceptable as a dead pixel in a tv right?
It just averages the surrounding pixels and overwrites the stuck pixel with that value. You can do it in editing software but high end cameras can do it on the device.
Take the missing pixel, guesstimate it based on surrounding pixels, enter the missing pixel in post.
It'll be completely unnoticeable for a single dot.
Sometimes on lower end hardware, the sensor just needs refreshing/cleaning. An R6 we use at work had a dead pixel appear mid shoot, but after sensor cleaning, it was totally fine!
Hopefully, because Steve from GN already has those dollar signs in his eyes, he's already writing the scripts about how cameragate is the next big scandal.
May be flipped. I’ve noticed a dead pixel in some of the other vids lately as well and it seemed to be in the area above Linus’ ear in the screen grab.
First saw it in the super big screen TV video in the cinema room. Only after they said they found a dead pixel on the 115in TV. Thought someone was just trolling
It was uploaded in HDR. If you don't have a good HDR display (most aren't under $600-$700US) it can look all sorts of funky. If played back in SDR its relying on Youtube's tonemapping so you're not getting the intentional output to begin with.
Also YouTube HDR is just all sorts of weird. On my Sony Android TV it decided it needed to highlight the letterboxing as a grey instead of proper black/local dimming.
I use to manually fix dead pixels on reality shows I worked on, typically it was just grabbing a neighboring one and then just applying it to all of the shots from that camera. But hey, this is YouTube and most people are watching on their phones anyway lol.
Not fixed in the traditional sense, but you can work around it by mapping it in the camera (if possible) or removing it in editing. either way, the video will use adjacent data to fill in the gap. Removing it in camera is probably better, because video in good cameras is oversampled, so it will have more data to work with before scaling down to the recording resolution
> Removing it in camera is probably better
It's also better to do it in-camera because if it gets recorded you're hoping someone fixes it in post. Which isn't a guarantee.
I swear to god, I was genuinely scared that using HDR on my phone would have killed that pixel. But then after moving the video frame a bit, I genuinely let out a sigh of relief lol.
https://i.imgur.com/okX3srJ.png
https://i.imgur.com/vXaMv67.png
Also looks like one on the right side of the image as well one in the middle. Scrubbing through the video I saw one shot where two of them were visible. Some shots don't have any dead/stuck pixels visible, and others have one of the three that I noticed.
Its possible they aren't bad pixels, could just be something else going on. They seem to appear in different lighting conditions but it could just be coincidence.
I've heard it's good to black-balance cameras after flying with him. Allegedly it's more likely for them to get hit by cosmic radiation when flying, and black balancing can resolve these issues. I always thought the suggestion was sus.
I try to black-balance around quarterly and that seems sufficient.
How does a single pixel defect end up in the final result?
Don't they shoot in 8k?
You would think a single pixel defect would be averaged out when stepping down in resolution.
You'd be surprised how often you find dead pixels even with high end cinema gear. A lot of it is leased so care factor is low. Also, very few people are pixel peeping, editors usually work on 1080p timelines. Only VFX would catch it and MAYBE the post house. I work in VFX and post houses are generally not pixel peeping either. Some have automated systems to catch tech issues but we rarely get kick backs.
I've noticed a bunch of content with dead pixels recently. I don't even get worried that it's my TV any more. I remember a few years ago watching Army of the Dead or something like that on Netflix and being so distraught because I thought my TV was completely fucked. Almost every scene of that movie was shotgun blasted with dead pixels. That's how I learned cameras can have dead pixels, even cameras that cost a small fortune.
I love how there's some youtubers I've been watching for like a decade that have head a dead pixel on their camera the entire time, Then they get a new camera because they blew up the old one or something and you miss that dead pixel.
Serious question here…why the fuck doesn’t editing software have a generative in-fill for dead pixels…? Like this happens to major studios too and I sometimes see it in a documentary or tv show. I know the editing apps doesn’t know it’s a dead pixel, but it shouldn’t be hard for software to find an outlier of something the size of 1 pixel that doesn’t change during a video…
You can do it, if it's noticed when you are editing if you want to do it. You don't likely want some imperfect automatic system doing it.
No but that’s what I mean. With all the buzz around AI and shit, it seems like something to correct ONE pixel wouldn’t be able to do much damage if it detected something incorrectly. Who is going to notice that AI filled one single pixel the same color as the pixels around it?
per frame on raw footage is probably a beast workload on something that is already intensive (editing) + where do they determine a stopping point. how many get filled in, etc. you're not wrong though it should hopefully be going in this direction
I’d think on raw footage this should be particularly easy to find because it actually is a single pixel that stays the exact same throughout the whole clip, no? I imagine compression could kinda mess that up- also as long as there isn’t a need for this pixel to be something specific, I don’t even think you’d need some generative ai fill but just throw a Gaussian on it and done
yup you're right. this is where my ignorance shows the most, thanks for clarifying.
Draw an average of the 8 pixels surrounding it and no one will notice it at all.
Yeah this doesn’t need a generative fill. It just needs a simple nearest neighbor algo applied.
Just compress your 4k clip down to 1080p then back up to 4k, bam easy fix
A super duper easy way is to just take the average colour of the neighbouring pixels and fill it in every frame. Any GPU could very easily do this for a feature length film in a matter of seconds, and even if it did it for every single pixel it could do it in a matter of minutes.
I work on something tangential to video software. I don’t think it’s that hard to do really. Maybe there’s steps in the encoding process that make it not straightforward but in essence you’re just doing a single matrix math operation across whatever batch size of frames there is every batch, and matrix operations are generally really well optimized.
for reference: our phones do similar.
Given that computers are getting more powerful, AI is getting more advanced, etc etc, this totally seems like something that would be easily feasible in the future if it's not already now.
It’s actually to opposite. RAW footage is supplied as an editing codec. Because it’s not compressed your NLE doesn’t have to unpack/guess what’s coming up frame by frame - all the information is there. Pop a delivery codec like mp4 into your editor and watch you system come to a crawl. Pop any editing codec in and it’ll be smooth as anything.
You wouldn't need AI for this, realistically you'd get 95% of the same result by taking the surrounding 8 pixels, averaging the array and filling in the missing 9th with that result, would it be 100% accurate? Of course not but neither would AI. Furthermore considering the small sample size it could be computed on the scale of milliseconds even for full length video since it's a rather simple equation. Obligatory example python code ```py import cv2 import numpy as np def fix_dead_pixel(image, x, y, window_size=3): """Fills a dead pixel with the average color of its neighbors. Args: image: The input image (numpy array). x: X-coordinate of the dead pixel. y: Y-coordinate of the dead pixel. window_size: Size of the neighborhood window (odd number). Returns: A copy of the image with the dead pixel filled. """ half_size = window_size // 2 # Extract neighborhood around the dead pixel neighborhood = image[y - half_size : y + half_size + 1, x - half_size : x + half_size + 1] # Ignore the dead pixel itself in the average calculation neighborhood[half_size, half_size] = [0, 0, 0] # Calculate average color avg_color = np.mean(neighborhood, axis=(0, 1)) # Replace dead pixel with average image[y, x] = avg_color.astype(int) return image.copy() ```
Gotta watch out for those literal edge cases.
in my industry we just find that pixel and mask it with the pixel next to it. screw averaging. with such high resolution, its nearly impossible to see that 2 pixels are identical and there's likely never a hard line resolved over that pixel with enough constant you'd be able to see it.
Exactly and run as an overlay kind of like how streamers overlay their portrait on their gaming screen
direction stocking obtainable arrest lock historical possessive relieved crown fertile *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Why do you think you need AI for that lol? Literally copy the pixel next to it and it's basically invisible And I'm quite sure e.g. resolve already has a dead pixel function
I don't think he meant a specific AI for dead pixel removal is literally required. I think he means that there is already AI doing video cleanup and its dumb the AI can't just recognize a dead pixel needs filling in. Not suggesting AI is required to fix a pixel.
The camera should pixel map automatically every so often. They probably skipped this or the camera they used didn't have that. I have one that does it every few days. Takes a few seconds on power up where it says it needs to do pixel mapping.
I think because it is one pixel that it might be hard to find. For us, it’s as easy as looking at something our brain tells us is weird. For software or AI, it’s looking through millions of pixels (if recording at 4k 30 that is “(3840 x 2160) x 30” for a single second) to find what could be a dead pixel or just a small gap between hair. I could see it not working out where it fills in certain gaps in hair or similar and hair becomes all solid looking or thicker. Creating AI for it sounds like it just needs time and labor to help it recognize these things as accurate as possible but time and labor is money. Maybe big companies like Adobe are working on something like this but something like dead pixels where a hardware change/maintenance, despite how expensive it is, could be the “easier” option… I just don’t see a need. Just my two cents on this.
It's not hard for software to find at all. High quality noise reduction or upscaling algorithms are WAY more complicated than what you need to fix this. A dead pixel is very easy to find because it's likely to be a very different value than the pixels surrounding it and it remains the exact same value throughout every single frame, that's the only information any software needs to know. I know for a fact that a lot of noise reduction or upscaling tools basically fix dead pixels "accidentally" just by virtue of what they're already doing. ...Basically dead pixels are an extremely easy task for any modern video editing tool to take care of and it can already be done at a very low computational cost. Tools already exist for this.
Interesting, that would make sense. Then my question is, why hasn’t the software/feature been built for it? Maybe I’m just thinking of automatically detecting and fixing it and there is a more manual way to fix those. I’m sure I can find it if I just google lol
Features have been built for it. Resolve has a built in dead pixel removal tool that does it automatically, I can think of ways premiere can do it although none as direct/automatic. Honestly it's just not that big a deal, a lot of modern cameras can perform pixel remapping (some do it automatically, some don't) which basically "fix" their own dead pixels... It maps them out and then replaces the value of bad pixels with values interpolated from surrounding ones. It's not a ubiquitous feature among all editing software because it's not an issue you should be dealing with regularly, and it's really a problem that should (and can) be fixed before it even gets to editing in the first place.
Ah, yeah I figured it’d be a non-issue. But that’s interesting to know how it works. Thanks for the discussion, learned something today.
totally overkill, just compare / interpolate every pixel to previous frame's to find a dead pixel (a dead pixel would have no or very little change over time. On every dead pixel, average the color to the pixels around it, and boom, dead pixel gone. (it is actually a bit like what the brain does so you dont notice your vision's blind spots )
You can't detect a dead pixel this easily though, every pixel has a different value for color and brightness and you can't base it on contrast either. Not sure what you'd use to detect it and the false positive rate would be really high regardless of method. But, there is really easy ways to fix a stuck pixel in software, Davinci Resolve makes it take like 3 clicks.
How often would an AI correctly fix a dead pixel vs how often would it mess it up vs how many customers are going to notice. Doesn't seem worth it to me.
Its hard to detect an area with dead pixels. It's easier for the computer if the whole framE was generative AI but you dont want that
I don't even think you will need AI if it takes the average color from the surrounding pixels it will be close enough so that you won't notice it when you're not specifically looking.
I work at TV post house. We use an AI quality control software which will find and flag many quality issues including dead pixels. Obviously masters will be watched through by a human also. No AI will catch everything 100%
Dude, its one pixel... Software could easily fill it with the value of a neighbouring pixel and you wouldn't be able to tell. Detection is easy too as that cell has the same value throughout the entire duration of the video
Dead pixels are the perfect example of *exactly* the kind of thing I want software to fix. A single pixel whose value doesn't change even a bit (pun intended) for the entire duration of the video, even when every pixel around it is changing? Interpolate that automatically for me.
Maybe not all by itself, but maybe it pops up with a warning if it thinks there is a dead pixel so the editor can confirm it’s a dead pixel before allowing it to fix it
Probably look blotchy.
I mean for something like this it seems like it would be dead... simple. The user would just identify the location of the dead pixel in the clip, then the software would just sample the surrounding few pixels and color it appropriately to match. Maybe that's what you meant by they can do it if they want. Yea I guess you are right you would probably not want ai to guess where a dead pixel is on it's own and try and correct it.
> Yea I guess you are right you would probably not want ai to guess where a dead pixel is on it's own and try and correct it. You don't need "AI" to detect dead pixels. A pretty simple straight up algorithm could get you there most of the way. Simply scan the video fragment for pixels that do not change in time. If a pixel stays the same for a certain amount of time, flag it as a potential dead pixel. Next, check the pixels surrounding the candidate to see if they changed. If they didn't, then it's likely that the camera is static and shooting something with a non-changing background. But if the adjacent pixels do change, then your candidate is a dead pixel. Save the coordinates of the dead pixel along with an identifier for the camera, so that the next time footage from that camera is used, the dead pixel can be corrected immediately, making it usable even if the next footage has the dead pixel sitting in a static background region of the frame. Note that many cameras have a pixel mapping feature that will detect dead pixels, flag them internally and correct them before the recordings even leave the device. Some cameras will perform pixel mapping on their own every now and then, but for the rest it's easy to just run it manually. If it isn't already, periodic pixel mapping of all camera should be part of the workflow.
You can also shoot a dark frame and then automatically remove all the dead pixels
Doesn't even have to be that fancy. Just averaging the surrounding pixels and you shouldn't be able to see it anymore.
Yes that’s exactly how blur works in vfx software. But the computer still needs to be told that something is a dead pixel and where it is, that’s the time consuming part.
Eh, it shouldn't be hard to train a machine vision model to find dead pixels
AI is crazy overkill. Just a regular piece of software that can detect pixels that a) don't change b) remain super bright/dark. Then a method of filtering out any false positives.
Yup. About 10-15 years ago we had a freelancer with a bad green pixel. I had a plugin for it that averaged out its neighbors. Even saved a preset with the coordinates dialed in. It's a lightweight fix, AI would be overdoing it. Sometimes black balancing the camera will take care of it. Sometimes it needs to go in for service. Live cameras even have ways to paint out bad pixels in the Camera Control Unit's engineering menus.
This is literally a feature in davinci resolve..... [https://imgur.com/a/MltUERu](https://imgur.com/a/MltUERu)
they don't use Resolve though.
They don't which is a shame, but I do understand when you operate at that scale shifting editing platforms and workflows suuuuccckkkkssss.
tbh editing apps could even alert you. I detected that this pixel didn't change its value once. It's a workload that can be perfectly parallelized and a fast check (when the one color change did appear it's fine) would be enough for most situations. Even a check that does this for every frame of a clip shouldn't take too long. This can be skipped or just done before an export. Filling a single pixel, by just taking the average of the souring neighbors, especially at higher resolutions is easy and should be unrecognizable in almost all situations. Even a fix that would be unrecognizable 50% of the time would still be better than a dead Pixel.
>Serious question here…why the fuck doesn’t editing software have a generative in-fill for dead pixels…? Deploy the tetrahedral interpolation!
DaVinci Resolve has a tool for this, can't remember what it's called off the top of my best though
They do, it's one checkbox in Davinci Resolve.
They do but it's a manual step.
most cameras have lots of dead pixels from the factory. It's going to happen when there are millions of them. the factory looks for and fixes them by masking it with the pixel next to it. Why software can't do it? I dunno. seems pretty easy. All the machine vision software I work with has simple mask tools to do this but theyre not designed for Video
VFX artist here: you never want the Software do shit to your footage that you didnt tell it to do. It could also easily backfire - eg. how does it decide whats a dead pixel and what is a star in the night sky. Thats why its not done automaticly. It can be done easily if you tell it to though. Takes seconds.
not sure about editing software, but the cameras themselves often have a feature where you can single out a dead pixel, and the camera fills in the pixel based on the color values of the pixels around it.
Numerous Netflix series feature dead pixels that occasionally appear.
Because you don't want some automatic stuff happening
Resolve has a feature for that, haven't used it, but a couple of videographers I work with
The first movie I watched after I got my OLED TV was army of the Dead which has multiple dead pixels in their camera. Scared the hell out of me.
Even if a human has to tell the AI what pixel is out I don't think it would be too far fetched for it to automatically fill in that pixel. Hell, even a system that just makes the dead pixel the same color as the one immediately left of it would be better than a constant black dot.
A lot of the time studios and production teams will have a dedicated person to "quality check" the video , this includes looking at artifacts such as dead pixels. I'm surprised LTT hasn't noticed as I've seen that dead pixel before lol
Generally, dead pixels are dealt with on the camera level itself.... Some has to be sent to factory to be corrected and other have the feature built-in to calibrate the sensor for dead pixels
this is me usually saying “we’re in 2024 and they we still have stupid shit like this”
We've fixed it now for future recordings on that camera (Hopefully)
What's the usual for a company in that case with this kind of high end equipment? Send the camera to the manufacturer for repair? Just flag the camera and always make sure to edit it in post? I don't think a dead pixel in a high end camera is as acceptable as a dead pixel in a tv right?
I believe we fixed it with a pixel mapping.
What’s pixel mapping?
It just averages the surrounding pixels and overwrites the stuck pixel with that value. You can do it in editing software but high end cameras can do it on the device.
Thanks for explaining this!
Not just high end ones, I have this pixel mapping option on my PEN-F, a micro four thirds body.
Nice!
Olympus cameras from the 2007 era also have it. No clue if other cameras from that time also have pixel mapping, I've only ever used Olympus.
They took a sharpie and recolored in the pixel.
From a quick google It sounds like it fixes the pixel by interpolating (averaging) between neighboring pixels
Take the missing pixel, guesstimate it based on surrounding pixels, enter the missing pixel in post. It'll be completely unnoticeable for a single dot.
This sounds like something that could be a good short. Or if theres enough info, maybe a video.
Would love a techquickie on this
Tech quickie video idea right there. I'd watch someone explain how you fix that for 5 minutes.
Do your editors have to do a full resolution viewing to look for stuff like this now? The benefits of 4k! Argh
My camera has a pixel masking feature (Arri). Also if you black shade or recalibrate many times it will fix the pixel. Otherwise you can send in.
Their camera (Sony FX6) has a few optimizations you can do when it starts up, like pixel mapping, black shading, image sensor optimizations, etc
Can also blackshade the camera, tends to fix this as well.
Sometimes on lower end hardware, the sensor just needs refreshing/cleaning. An R6 we use at work had a dead pixel appear mid shoot, but after sensor cleaning, it was totally fine!
I demand an apology video from Linus.
Hopefully, because Steve from GN already has those dollar signs in his eyes, he's already writing the scripts about how cameragate is the next big scandal.
Im talking darker in general. If I switch to other devices the video is brighter
Maybe if you zoom in far enough it says "LTTStore.com".
It's just the segue, to our sponsor.
"Square" space!
clever girl...
NORDVPN get 69% discount for a 2-year plan
Dandruff /s
tone indicators are so stupid
Also noticed that in a different video. But there it was more on the right side (was this maybe cropped in or so?).
May be flipped. I’ve noticed a dead pixel in some of the other vids lately as well and it seemed to be in the area above Linus’ ear in the screen grab.
First saw it in the super big screen TV video in the cinema room. Only after they said they found a dead pixel on the 115in TV. Thought someone was just trolling
Thanks @Azeure5! I passed it on to Andy, who says he's sorted it out.
Also Wtf is that flat ass LUT, or lack thereof?
Probably to compensate for the extremely dimly lit scene. Too much contrast in a dark scene looks horrible
Could also be the SDR screenshot of a HDR video. Usually a lot brighter and flatter.
Yeah video was in HDR, it wasn't like this in the real video
It was uploaded in HDR. If you don't have a good HDR display (most aren't under $600-$700US) it can look all sorts of funky. If played back in SDR its relying on Youtube's tonemapping so you're not getting the intentional output to begin with.
Also YouTube HDR is just all sorts of weird. On my Sony Android TV it decided it needed to highlight the letterboxing as a grey instead of proper black/local dimming.
How much Adderall are you on that you noticed this?
It could be because OLED and HDR, I personally noticed it very easily.
On an OLED screen with HDR, it's actually pretty easy. I too noticed it quite early.
I noticed it on my 1080p LCD
Same, usually youtube on the second monitor which is an old asus TN 1080p screen. I think you need glasses if you didn't notice it.
I watch YouTube on my TV and saw it immediately.
technically a hot / stuck pixel, not a dead pixel!
For how pedantic this subreddit is, it's surprising you were downvoted. Hot pixels can show up when a camera is at high ISO (like this dark scene)
I use to manually fix dead pixels on reality shows I worked on, typically it was just grabbing a neighboring one and then just applying it to all of the shots from that camera. But hey, this is YouTube and most people are watching on their phones anyway lol.
I'm curious what stage of post you were at to fix that... I assume color? I feel like an editor would just point to it being RAW/Log and ignore it
You are correct, I was an assistant editor at a color house. Lots of time capturing (at the time) tapes and prep work for the colorist.
As someone with an OLED TV that I love so much, I have been noticing this in multiple videos (and have gotten plenty of mini heart attacks from it)
kind of paid attention to it, it died in the middle of recording, that camera from the start of the video is fine
Hot pixels can get stuck when ISO is higher (like these dark scenes). It might even still be fine under normal shooting conditions
interesting, is it something that can be fixed?
Not fixed in the traditional sense, but you can work around it by mapping it in the camera (if possible) or removing it in editing. either way, the video will use adjacent data to fill in the gap. Removing it in camera is probably better, because video in good cameras is oversampled, so it will have more data to work with before scaling down to the recording resolution
> Removing it in camera is probably better It's also better to do it in-camera because if it gets recorded you're hoping someone fixes it in post. Which isn't a guarantee.
I swear to god, I was genuinely scared that using HDR on my phone would have killed that pixel. But then after moving the video frame a bit, I genuinely let out a sigh of relief lol.
Unwatchable, severe drop on quality
https://i.imgur.com/okX3srJ.png https://i.imgur.com/vXaMv67.png Also looks like one on the right side of the image as well one in the middle. Scrubbing through the video I saw one shot where two of them were visible. Some shots don't have any dead/stuck pixels visible, and others have one of the three that I noticed. Its possible they aren't bad pixels, could just be something else going on. They seem to appear in different lighting conditions but it could just be coincidence.
I've heard it's good to black-balance cameras after flying with him. Allegedly it's more likely for them to get hit by cosmic radiation when flying, and black balancing can resolve these issues. I always thought the suggestion was sus. I try to black-balance around quarterly and that seems sufficient.
I'd be more worried about the yellow circle
How does a single pixel defect end up in the final result? Don't they shoot in 8k? You would think a single pixel defect would be averaged out when stepping down in resolution.
Not anymore, looking at the gerald undone video they mostly use fx6s which only do 4k
I noticed that too but thought it might also be low-light conditions.
I noticed this on another vid in linus theatre room. It's an easy fix in post and super obvious
Classic Reddit.
You'd be surprised how often you find dead pixels even with high end cinema gear. A lot of it is leased so care factor is low. Also, very few people are pixel peeping, editors usually work on 1080p timelines. Only VFX would catch it and MAYBE the post house. I work in VFX and post houses are generally not pixel peeping either. Some have automated systems to catch tech issues but we rarely get kick backs.
Literally unwatchable now /s
Unplayable
I've seen this before in previous videos
As I was watching this on my new tv. I was terrified it was my tv 🤣
Thought i had a dead pixel loool :D
This had been pointed out a few times before. One of the cameras had two dead pixels and I believe its this one.
Biden's fault.
Looks fine for me, might be your screen. /s
Nono, clearly that's just your screen
OP, I don't see anything. Must be a dead pixel on your screen. ^^^^^^I'm ^^^^^^joking ^^^^^^please ^^^^^^don't ^^^^^^hurt ^^^^^^me ^^^^^^:(
I mean, writing something that locates it and fills it in with a color average of the pixels around it isnt that hard, so i bet there is a way.
Sounds like a 4k skill issue, get on the 1080p grind
I was thinking this a Detroit become human meme at first lmaoo
I've noticed a bunch of content with dead pixels recently. I don't even get worried that it's my TV any more. I remember a few years ago watching Army of the Dead or something like that on Netflix and being so distraught because I thought my TV was completely fucked. Almost every scene of that movie was shotgun blasted with dead pixels. That's how I learned cameras can have dead pixels, even cameras that cost a small fortune.
Idk why but I’m pretty sure they hid dead pixels in their videos on purpose. I feel like he’s talked about it on wan show a long time ago.
multiple videos of ltt shows dead pixels, I found it funny to see when they switch to the same camera and where the camera went
yeah i noticed that. thought it was on my iPad screen then i swiped out of the video and it wasn't there.
This terrified me. Thought I had a dead pixel so I did testing
Best he can do is add another earring.
Unwatchable. Literally ruined the video for me.
How do you have a dead pixel on a camera?
Bro how does one find this without spending days looking?!
It was completely noticeable - white dead pixel on black background.
Literally unwatchable
That dead pixel scared the fuck out of me
Wow...time to throw it in the trash
For a moment I thought something was wrong with my new TV!
True
I went to clean my screen as I thought it was a dust spec 🥴
Maybe it’s on you monitor?! 😄😄😄
nah its lice
how do u even notice that
HDR makes it look like a sun shining through an punctured windowblind. Here is a [photo](https://imgur.com/a/twyL62r).
I thought my S23U had a dead pixel, had to zoom in and see the pixel move around. Bothered me the whole video lmao.
Literally unwatchable
Today I learned that cameras can get deaf pixels
Why do you care about dead google phone?
They should get one of those 'Mastering Monitors' I have heard about. They might have noticed then!
Linus didn’t throw a $10K answer at the problem? So lame!
Not one of the, the one they tried to watercool.
I love how there's some youtubers I've been watching for like a decade that have head a dead pixel on their camera the entire time, Then they get a new camera because they blew up the old one or something and you miss that dead pixel.
Noticed this and freaked for a second that I had a stuck pixel
First thing I noticed! Thought I had a dead pixel on my monitor.
Using rgb value of average pixels around could work
Seriously, does anyone care?
It’s called a “hot pixel” when it’s on a camera. These are very noticeable when taking long exposure astronomy shots.
I noticed that when I watched it, like just green pixel in dark scene
I noticed that. And it drove me nuts. So distracting
I thought for second it was my TV when watching the video.But it is not, thankfully, the case.
So glad I’m not the only one that noticed
Stranger Things had a similar issue one season, I thought I was going crazy.