>>1101118>In the subsection "Intervention" they describe it fairly sufficientlyI guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that: to me this looks like submitting a paper to siggraph that reads
>the image was processed with software, that we modified to specifically address these artifacts. The software was produced by a trained engineer and run on a computer. Care was taken to record results, and an auditor made sure it didn't break the computer.I mean look at it, it's basically two sentences saying "we used a magic video" followed by a protracted ethics statement. There's no way you could hope to even describe the intervention from that section, let alone plan to replicate it.
