Conversation
|
Live runtime validation completed on the exact PR head
No camera frames were recorded or saved. This validates runtime stability and performance only; visual acceptance for gray/dark fringe, fine-hair retention, and motion flicker is still pending, so the PR remains draft. |
|
Visual acceptance did not pass. During the live patched run, the maintainer observed a distinct body boundary that did not fade naturally. Runtime stability and FPS remained good, but those results are not sufficient for merge. Keep this draft blocked. The next pass must identify whether the outline occurs in Blur, Remove, or both, and whether it is dark, bright, or simply over-sharpened before changing the repair curve. Any revision must retain fine hair and pass the same live mode-cycle test. |
|
Follow-up validation completed on exact head 55a833e. The first Blur approach was rejected because it made the feathered body boundary more visible. The revised implementation keeps that color repair only in Remove, restores working Dilate and Softness controls for Blur, and removes the broad close that was bridging raised hands. The live pass also exposed and fixed a CuPy signed-int64 reduction failure that had forced matte refinement onto CPU. Final checks:
The PR remains draft only because issue #91 still calls for a controlled direct-sunlight/backlit comparison. |
55a833e to
05bad1c
Compare
|
Rebased this onto current Exact head The code gate is clear. I am keeping the PR in draft only for the final controlled direct-sunlight/backlit camera comparison, especially hair, facial hair, body edges, and gaps between raised fingers or hands. If that visual pass holds, this is the next PR to merge. |
05bad1c to
4086723
Compare
Summary
UnreleasedchangelogRelated to #91.
Why
Remove composites onto synthetic green, so contaminated physical-background colors need an on-device clean-subject reference. Blur composites against a blurred copy of the same camera frame; applying the same color repair made its feathered matte visible as a distinct rim.
Live testing also proved that Blur ignored Dilate and Softness. It always used a fixed two-pass 7x7 dilation, several wide Gaussian passes, and a 25x25 close at half resolution. That inflated the body outline and could seal the exterior gap between raised hands. The revised Blur path honors the configured kernels, retains minimal anti-aliasing and bounded tiny-hole cleanup, and does not broadly close exterior gaps.
The live pass exposed a separate CuPy failure in small-hole cleanup. Connected-component coordinates were signed 64-bit integers, which indexed min/max reductions do not support. They now use safe component-label reductions instead of forcing matte refinement back to the CPU.
Validation
maine1fbffb4086723revisionRemaining merge gate
Keep this PR in draft until one controlled direct-sunlight/backlit camera comparison confirms that hair, facial hair, body edges, and gaps between raised fingers or hands remain natural in motion. If that visual pass holds, this is ready to merge.