Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

mortenhannemose.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 228 posts

Re: Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

#211

Post by zzo38computer »

hristov wrote: post #117

So if the "troubled origin" of the Lena picture is the fact that she was nude (yet the picture used for computer science was cropped and did not use any of the nude parts) then why should the replacement be another photo that suggests it is a cropped nude? Is it the fact that the original Lena picture was pretty and alluring and this one is gross, that makes it "ethically sourced"? Or is that a bad joke? I hope the a…

> Multiple images of people of different color skins, and clothing styles should be used because nowadays it is very easy to over-tune your compression algorithm to a specific type of image or skin tone.

This is true. I have mentioned using different pictures to ensure not over-tuned for only one picture (I did not use those words, but thank you for mentioning, a better way to mention it). Different colours of skins and different clothing styles is one thing, but furthermore, you should not be limited to pictures of people, either (although some of them should be pictures of people, but not all of them); there are other living and non-living things to take pictures of, too.

Re: Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

#212

Post by zzo38computer »

drabbiticus wrote: post #166
chillingeffect wrote: post #88

who is in this picture? how do we know this is ethically-sourced? is this revenge-porn by an angry ex of person in the picture?

Low-effort FUD. This is an image of the author, who is a tenure track assistant professor in Denmark. Your comment is not constructive, is not based on any evidence, and can be addressed through simply clinking through 1 link in the OP.

> This is an image of the author

It is confusing. They called the picture file "Lena" even though the author's name is not Lena.

Re: Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

#213

Post by pseudalopex »

enriquto wrote: post #22
seventytwo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn’t realize the model doesn’t want people using it. That holds more weight in my mind than the fact that it was in playboy.

It's not so clear that she doesn't want people to use that image. She has assisted several times at image processing conferences, and has stated recently that she was proud of the fact that so many people used that photo. The documentary linked above shows footage of herself talking about the photo, but she never really says people should not use it. The website hosting the documentary has several heavily editorializ…

“I retired from modelling a long time ago. It’s time I retired from tech, too. We can make a simple change today that creates a lasting change for tomorrow. Let’s commit to losing me.”

She can be proud of her work and not want it used where it makes other people uncomfortable.

Re: Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

#214

Post by pseudalopex »

zzo38computer wrote: post #199

I think that, when working with digital image processing, it is helpful to have a variety of pictures (photographs of different things (some of which are pictures of people, and some of which aren't), both landscape and portrait orientation (some algorithms might work better one way or other), art, line drawings, pictures drawn by computer, colours, monochrome, etc) to test with. Wikipedia says about the Lena picture…

Munson advised authors use a different image if they could. And suggested more variety would produce better compression.[1]

[1] http://www.lenna.org/editor.html

Re: Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

#215

Post by pseudalopex »

sorenjan wrote: post #43
vidarh wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She doesn't have any way to force people to stop, but that doesn't mean people can't take her opinion into account.

Her opinion doesn't seem to match the articles claim: > Lena doesn’t harbor any resentment toward Sawchuk and his imitators for how they appropriated her image; the only note of regret she expressed was that she wasn’t better compensated. In her view, the photograph is an immense accomplishment that just happened to take on a life of its own. “I’m really proud of that picture,” she said.

“I retired from modelling a long time ago. It’s time I retired from tech, too. We can make a simple change today that creates a lasting change for tomorrow. Let’s commit to losing me.”[1]

Being proud of her work doesn't mean she thinks people should have to see it in their work.

[1] https://www.thedrum.com/news/2019/11/19/gender-equality-ad-c...

Re: Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

#216

Post by jb3689 »

olalonde wrote: post #39

This is like GitHub renaming master branch to main branch in an effort to attract more Black Americans to tech. AKA a virtue signaling side show that accomplishes absolutely nothing. No one even knew it came from a Playboy magasine until this whole "retire Lena" movement.

This is nothing like master vs. main debate. The photo was unmistakenly cropped from a nude photo and used in research. Do you think Github really was thinking about race when they used master? The link is factual vs. coincidental. I'm personally appalled that an entire industry has never seriously questioned where the photo came from (or questioned it and then shrugged it off).

Re: Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

#217

Post by luckylion »

mock-possum wrote: post #180
luckylion wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, after like 50 years of saying the opposite, including a few months before that statement was given. It looks like a SJW campaign approached her about it to make some noise but didn't really bother enough to keep their website secured with a valid SSL certificate.

This comment is so gross. Consent can be revoked at any time. Bringing up 'SWJ campaign' as if it's some sort of bogeyman that immediately delegitimizes her wishes is a red flag.

Consent to a contract cannot be revoked at any time, no. And it's obvious that something happened in those 6 months between "yay" and "wow, it's horrible", and that's where the campaign happens to be in. You may find it gross to speak of the truth, but that doesn't change it.

Re: Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

#218

Post by drabbiticus »

zzo38computer wrote: post #212
drabbiticus wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Low-effort FUD. This is an image of the author, who is a tenure track assistant professor in Denmark. Your comment is not constructive, is not based on any evidence, and can be addressed through simply clinking through 1 link in the OP.

> This is an image of the author It is confusing. They called the picture file "Lena" even though the author's name is not Lena.

Sure, referential things are confusing to you if you don't know the reference.

Nevertheless, HN has clear guidelines about comments. Of particular relevance is

> Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

More generally, HN can be a great place when people take the time to consider their response and do a little digging. Discussions are more meaningful and fruitful if the the participates are minimally knowledgeable on the topic being discussed. This goes for any topic. Imagine if the reply to a machine learning post was asking "what if this picture-sorting AI became sentient and starting destroying the world? How can we know the scientists working on this can outsmart the AI? How can we be sure that they are being kind to our future overlords?"? They may feel that their view is completely valid, reasonable and informed because of the wealth of Sci-Fi literature that they have read, despite never having attempted to grapple with the actual material being submitted to HN.

Re: Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

#219

Post by drabbiticus »

drabbiticus wrote: post #218
zzo38computer wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is an image of the author It is confusing. They called the picture file "Lena" even though the author's name is not Lena.

Sure, referential things are confusing to you if you don't know the reference. Nevertheless, HN has clear guidelines about comments. Of particular relevance is > Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. More generally, HN can be a great place when people take the time to consider their response and do a little digging. Discussions are more meaningful and fruitful i…

should add an edit:

if the participants are (at least) minimally knowledgeable

Re: Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

#220

Post by daneel_w »

CharlesW wrote: post #94
daneel_w wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whose consent? The model's, who never owned the rights to the photograph, or Playboy who does? Both parties gave consent to a million readers across the world to see the full picture .

This is not how photo licensing works. Photos don't magically become public domain because they've been published. There was never any license for it to be re-published and re-distributed in the context of test imagery.

The "turmoil" around the use of this image was never about legality, licensing or royalties. By agreeing to the contract, and by publishing the picture, the publisher and the model gave their "social consent" for everyone to see it. In a fit of moralism the model had a change of mind about the picture; but likely not about her economic gain.
Post reply on HN