<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>High Perceptual Quality Image Denoising with a Posterior Sampling CGAN · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2103.04192/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2103.04192/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>High Perceptual Quality Image Denoising with a Posterior Sampling CGAN — mentioned by fxtentacle</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32181471</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2103.04192:32181471</guid><pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2022 16:37:05 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; The denoising part of a denoising autoencoder refers to the noise applied to its input Agree, it converts a noisy image to a denoised image. But the odd thing is, when you put a noisy image into a StyleGAN2 encoder, you get latents which the decoder will turn into a de-noised image. So in practical use, you can take a trained StyleGAN2 encoder/decoder pair and use it as if it was a denoiser. For example https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.04192 &amp;gt; These differences lead to learned distributions in the latent space that are entirely different I also agree there. The training for a denoising…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2103.04192/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item></channel></rss>
