Compare noise and detail together
Reduced artifacts alone do not establish faithful recovery of fine hairs, brushwork or a signature.
IMAGE RESTORATION · COMPARATIVE STUDY
Image restoration, compared
Compare original, degraded and restored photographs and paintings at the same position and scale. Choose a degradation condition and method to inspect changes in artifacts and detail.
01 /
Choose an image — reduced previews
Select the original or any processing stage independently on either side. All views use the same image coordinates and scale. At 100%, one source pixel corresponds to one CSS pixel. Scroll larger views within each frame; the three detail views pan together.
Left · Degraded inputRight · Restoration output
02 /
Three views of the same region
The original and your selected left and right images. Region, scale, degradation and method follow the comparison above. Scroll within each frame when an image is larger than the frame.
03 /
Reading the comparison
Compare against the original
Synthetic JPEG compression, tonal quantization and clean controls can be selected for the available methods.
Saved results under fixed conditions
These examples do not measure a general success rate or artist acceptance.
Full-resolution images, saved comparisons & records
Method, display guide & limitations
- JPEG Q10 / Q20 / Q40 / Q60 and 5-bit / 4-bit quantization are synthetic conditions. Available methods depend on the image and condition; CODiff is selected initially when available.
- The original is provided for evaluation. It was not passed as an additional model reference or pasted into outputs. Clean controls process the unchanged original as their declared input.
- Images and crops retain native coordinates, including the 1254 × 1254 watercolor. All selected stages and the three-view strip share the same display scale.
- The saved PNG comparison sheets retain their Japanese headings. Their columns are Original / Degraded input (or clean control) / Restoration output.