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

A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

appleinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 414 posts

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#391

Post by esskay »

alt227 wrote: post #285
esskay wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're fine with Apple deciding what the subject of pictures should be and how they should look that's fine, but I expect a lot of people wont be. The majority dont care, as the majority are not photographers, nor is it meant to be a product for photographers. Average joe just wants a good photo of that moment, which it does exceptionally well. The tech 'taking control from you' is its exact purpose, as again, n…

The bride in the original article doesnt seem to be a photographer, yet she seems to care quite a bit that the photo is not an acurate representation of reality at that moment.

Yep and it's one of those very rare occasions where something odd happens. You and I both know fully well that its not 'the norm', hence why average joe couldn't care less.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#392

Post by k310 »

May I suggest getting a nice small pocket camera?

I have used a lumix with 8X optical zoom (for a very long time) that is smaller than most smartphones (albeit thicker, thanks to the fetish for ultra-thin phones), has a removable SD card, and doesn't do processing beyond what it normally takes to make jpegs. Newer ones might have raw, I haven't checked. It has outlived many phones, has a removable battery, doesn't have a single f/1.8 aperture, and has a macro mode that doesn't require you to be 1/4 inch from the subject. If it's lost or stolen, I haven't handed over all my financial and personal data.

What will they think of next?

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#393

Post by makeitdouble »

netsharc wrote: post #304
makeitdouble wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many "purists" are there in the wild ? I'd only see police and insurance agents needing pixel perfect depiction of reality as it's out of the sensor. Photography as an art was never about purity, and I think most of us want photos that reflect what we see and how we see it, and will take the technical steps to get that rendered. If the moon is beautiful and gently lights the landscape, I want a photo with both th…

I think the police/insurance topic will be a big deal soon. I still remember the first building inspectors walking around with digital cameras, and of course when smartphones with "good enough" cameras came they started using these... Now if society (including the courts) learn that the photos might not reflect reality, photo "evidence" could face issues being accepted by courts...

There's been dedicated camera apps with tempering protection baked in (still won't help if you trick the physical camera, but at least they make an effort on the data handling side)

I assume road assistance apps could also have that kind of feature. It's definitely becoming a thing.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#394

Post by Dah00n »

astrange wrote: post #272
Dah00n wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it actually did. And as it says in the link: > ".... if they can detect and preserve fabric, rope, cloud, and other textures, why not skin texture as well?" The phone changed the image on skin and not on random other things that wasn't a face. That is a filter, not normal image processing, when it happens only on X but not on Y. The only way to not get this filter on the phone is using RAW.

> And as it says in the link That is the opinion of an uninformed tech writer, and even besides that, he's not claiming it did happen but just that it could possibly happen. In this case you do have someone who knows how it works, that someone being me. > The phone changed the image on skin and not on random other things that wasn't a face. There are some reasons you'd want to process faces differently, namely that v…

>There are some reasons you'd want to process faces differently

Yes and then you have applied a filter.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#395

Post by astrange »

Dah00n wrote: post #394
astrange wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And as it says in the link That is the opinion of an uninformed tech writer, and even besides that, he's not claiming it did happen but just that it could possibly happen. In this case you do have someone who knows how it works, that someone being me. > The phone changed the image on skin and not on random other things that wasn't a face. There are some reasons you'd want to process faces differently, namely that v…

>There are some reasons you'd want to process faces differently Yes and then you have applied a filter.

It's done to make it more realistic, not less.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#396

Post by foldr »

kazinator wrote: post #380
foldr wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s no AI transformation altering her body posture. It’s just that the phone is blending multiple exposures during which she was posing in different ways. The phone doesn’t realize that the images of the women in the mirror correspond to the woman in the center, so it hasn’t felt it necessary to use the same keyframe as the reference for the different parts of the photo. People are jumping to crazy explanations f…

OP here: I've combined multiple photos into one, to create a family photo with everyone in it. 1. I didn't call it "photography", computational or otherwise. 2. My work was nearly flawless: certainly no glaring fuckups like reflections or shadows. 3. Everyone knew: I loudly announced that this picture is a composite: look how cool!

>1. I didn't call it "photography", computational or otherwise.

But why not? Composite photos date back to the dawn of photography: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Oscar-gustave-rejlander...

If you want to maintain your own idiosyncratic definition of the term that's up to you, but what you did certainly counts as photography on any ordinary understanding.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#397

Post by octacat »

pluc wrote: post #379
octacat wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Code is important too. They sell a good combo.

Yeah but I don't see that put forward nearly as much as all the camera tech they keep updating and promoting. I was just in Italy and they have building-sized promotional posters zoomed in on all the cameras at the back of the phone. Agreed it doesn't lend itself to advertising so much because it's less.. visual, but still I thought that was interesting.

marketing rarely correlates with reality. nowadays. uber: there is a car in 8 minutes from uuu! oh, thanks for ordering. now it is 20 minutes (30 in reality).

and even if correlates, it is cherrypicked (hi, sony camera specs.)

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#398

Post by _maelstrom »

doctoboggan wrote: post #103

I don't think this is true, Apple hasn't openly said they do this level of manipulation (although that doesn't mean they don't necessarily), and I don't think the range of motions she would have to go through would be possible within a single capture. Even with "Live Photos" this wouldn't happen.

The article says it was a panorama photo, which makes it much less interesting than live/hdr creating the same effect.

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#399

Post by _maelstrom »

It's buried in the article, but: "Coates was moving when the photo was taken, so when the shutter was pressed, many differing images were captured in that instant as the camera swept over the scene, since it was a panoramic photo capture."

So it's a pano doing normal pano things, but it's just surprising in context. If you have not yet tried it, you can have friends jump in and out of the frame as you slowly move across a scene and have silly photos where they appear more than once!

Edit: typo

Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography

#400

Post by realclayman »

This is very possible in panoramic mode. See the update in story:

Update December 2, 11:05 Updated with details about the photo being shot in Panoramic mode, which is why the bride-to-be had time to change position between the shots found in the mirror.

Post reply on HN