>>4194474>Ray tracingIs the technology required to allow this simulation to happen
>Is splitting light paths into RGB channels not...No, not in the slightest
>Parametrized (sic)...Irrelevant, because that's not what this project is doing, it is getting the distortion through simulated optics, not just a filter. You do understand there's a difference between simulating something accurately and using a simple filter to get an approximation, right?
>"Revolution"Has anyone said revolution, why have you put this in quotes? Why have you said it at all?
>Someone else could have done itAnyone can do anything anon, that's a very dumb comment. Can you find anyone else that HAS done this before?
>VSCO does the same thingNo, it doesn't, he's not splitting the color channels of the final image, he's splitting the light from the scene as different wavelengths travel through glass at different speeds, so he gets accurate chromatic aberrations.
>NoiseThat wasn't even one of his intended goals, but a byproduct of how long the rendering would take to do the amount of samples necessary for a cleaner image.
>But ai is the futureNo, it's merely another tool for photographers to use, whether it's ensuring accurate focus like Sony, or creating pleasing image colors like Google, it's no more transformative than auto metering or color film.
