Adding more example gifs

README.md

@@ -199,7 +199,10 @@ My best guess is that the models are learning some interesting rules about how t
 
 ![MovingSceneExample](https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FamiliarJubilantAsp-size_restricted.gif)
 
-Other ways to stabilize video add up as well. First, generally speaking rendering at a higher resolution (higher render_factor) will increase stability of colorization decisions.  This stands to reason because the model has higher fidelity image information to work with and will have a greater chance of making the "right" decision consistently.  Closely related to this is the use of resnet101 instead of resnet34 as the backbone of the generator- objects are detected more consistently and corrrectly with this. This is especially important for getting good, consistent skin rendering.  It can be particularly visually jarring if you wind up with "zombie limbs", for example.
+Other ways to stabilize video add up as well. First, generally speaking rendering at a higher resolution (higher render_factor) will increase stability of colorization decisions.  This stands to reason because the model has higher fidelity image information to work with and will have a greater chance of making the "right" decision consistently.  Closely related to this is the use of resnet101 instead of resnet34 as the backbone of the generator- objects are detected more consistently and corrrectly with this. This is especially important for getting good, consistent skin rendering.  It can be particularly visually jarring if you wind up with "zombie hands", for example.
+
+![ZombieHandExample](https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ThriftyInferiorIsabellinewheatear-size_restricted.gif)
+
 
 Additionally, gaussian noise augmentation during training appears to help but at this point the conclusions as to just how much are bit more tenuous (I just haven't formally measured this yet).  This is loosely based on work done in style transfer video, described here:  https://medium.com/element-ai-research-lab/stabilizing-neural-style-transfer-for-video-62675e203e42.  
 
@@ -210,6 +213,12 @@ Special thanks go to Rani Horev for his contributions in implementing this noise
 
 This is a new type of GAN training that I've developed to solve some key problems in the previous DeOldify model. It provides the benefits of GAN training while spending minimal time doing direct GAN training.  Instead, most of the training time is spent pretraining the generator and critic separately with more straight-forward, fast and reliable conventional methods.  A key insight here is that those more "conventional" methods generally get you most of the results you need, and that GANs can be used to close the gap on realism. During the very short amount of actual GAN training the generator not only gets the full realistic colorization capabilities that used to take days of progressively resized GAN training, but it also doesn't accrue nearly as much of the artifacts and other ugly baggage of GANs. In fact, you can pretty much eliminate glitches and artifacts almost entirely depending on your approach. As far as I know this is a new technique. And it's incredibly effective. 
 
+Original DeOldify Model
+![BeforeFlicker](https://thumbs.gfycat.com/CoordinatedVeneratedHogget-size_restricted.gif)
+
+NoGAN-Based DeOldify Model
+![AfterFlicker](https://thumbs.gfycat.com/OilyBlackArctichare-size_restricted.gif)
+
 The steps are as follows: First train the generator in a conventional way by itself with just the feature loss. Next, generate images from that, and train the critic on distinguishing between those outputs and real images as a basic binary classifier. Finally, train the generator and critic together in a GAN setting (starting right at the target size of 192px in this case).  Now for the weird part:  All the useful GAN training here only takes place within a very small window of time.  There's an inflection point where it appears the critic has transferred everything it can that is useful to the generator. Past this point, image quality oscillates between the best that you can get at the inflection point, or bad in a predictable way (orangish skin, overly red lips, etc).  There appears to be no productive training after the inflection point.  And this point lies within training on just 1% to 3% of the Imagenet Data!  That amounts to about 30-60 minutes of training at 192px.  
 
 The hard part is finding this inflection point.  So far, I've accomplished this by making a whole bunch of model save checkpoints (every 0.1% of data iterated on) and then just looking for the point where images look great before they go totally bonkers with orange skin (always the first thing to go). Additionally, generator rendering starts immediately getting glitchy and inconsistent at this point, which is no good particularly for video. What I'd really like to figure out is what the tell-tale sign of the inflection point is that can be easily automated as an early stopping point.  Unfortunately, nothing definitive is jumping out at me yet.  For one, it's happening in the middle of training loss decreasing- not when it flattens out, which would seem more reasonable on the surface.