We show a comparison of reconstruction results of directly extending MagViTv2 to 16× temporal compression against our method ProMAG at 16× with our progressive growing approach. ProMAG at 16× temporal compression has much more accurate reconstructions and not not contain artifacts observed in the reconstruction results of directly extending MagViTv2 to 16× temporal compression.
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=8)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=8)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=8)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=8)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=8)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=8)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=8)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=8)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=8)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=8)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=8)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=8)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=8)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=8)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=8)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=8)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=16)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=16)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=16)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=16)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=16)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=16)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=16)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=16)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=16)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=16)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=16)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=16)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=16)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=16)
Ground-Truth
MagViTv2-16× (zdim=16)
ProMAG-16× (zdim=16)