Stop hijacking the scrolling.
Roc Camera
91–100 of 491 posts
Re: Roc Camera
#92Can’t I just photo a printed AI generated pic? What use is the proof?
Re: Roc Camera
#93I used to be really (really really) into photography. I respect anyone working hard on a physical product, but this misses the mark on every front I can think of. The real issue that photographers grapple with, emotionally and financially, is that pictures have become so thoroughly commodified that nobody assigns them cultural value anymore. They are the thumbnail you see before the short video clip starts playing. N…
There is absolutely a market for social media that bans AI slop. People in general don’t want the slop, but it’s seeping in everywhere with no easy way to mass remove. The problem with the linked product is it’s basically DRM with a baked in encryption key. And we have seen time and time again that with enough effort, it’s always been possible to extract that key.
Also the inversed incentive problem: the less people think it can be done, the more value in doing it.
That said in theory TPMs are proof against this: putting that to the test at scale, publicly, would be quite useful.
Re: Roc Camera
#94I don't understand how the "proof" part works, like, what part of the input to the "proof generation" algorithm is so inherently tied to the real world that one cannot feed it "fake" data ?
I would also love to know this. Where can I read how it works?
Re: Roc Camera
#95I’m not seeing what this is product is trying to solve? A zero knowledge proof to say it isn’t AI ? I think you could do this with a disposable camera or Polaroids and a photo scanner that makes the zero knowledge proofs .
A different thread mentions "what if you take a photo of an AI photo with the Roc camera?" - I still think that would be hard due to perspective, lighting, various other artifacts.
Scanning an image would be much easier to dupe though - scanners are basically controlled perspective/lighting environments so scanning an actual polaroid vs an ai generated polaroid printed on photo paper would be pretty indistinguishable I think.
Re: Roc Camera
#96I am actually willing to support DIY camera efforts, but if you're semi-serious about taking pictures, this just wouldn't work. First, Raspberry Pi (I'm guessing this is a CM4/CM5) is a disaster for a camera board. Nobody wants a 20s boot every time you want to take a picture, cameras need to be near instantaneous. And you can't keep it on either, because the RPi can't really sleep. There are boards that can actually sleep, but with fewer sensor options.
Now moving on to the sensor (IMX 519 - Arducam?) - it's tinier than the tiniest sensor found on phones. If you really want to have decent image quality, you should look at Will Whang's OneInchEye and Four-thirds eye (https://www.willwhang.dev/). 4/3 Eye uses IMX294 which is currently the only large sensor which has Linux support (I think he upstreamed it) and MIPI. All the other larger sensors use interfaces like SLVS which are impossible to connect to.
If anyone's going to attempt a serious camera, they need to do two things. Use at least a 1 inch sensor, and a board which can actually sleep (which means it can't be the RPi). This would mean a bunch of difficult work, such as drivers to get these sensors to work with those boards. The Alice Camera (https://www.alice.camera/) is a better attempt and probably uses the IMX294 as well. The most impressive attempt however is Wenting Zhang's Sitina S1 - (https://rangefinderforum.com/threads/diy-full-frame-digital-...). He used a full frame Kodak CCD Sensor.
There is a market for a well made camera like the Fuji X-Half. It doesn't need to have a lot of features, just needs to have ergonomics and take decent pictures. Stuff like proofs are secondary to what actually matters - first it needs to take good pictures, which the IMX 519 is going to struggle with.
Re: Roc Camera
#97Is this another cash grab? The founders who made this don't seem to know what real photography is.
Re: Roc Camera
#98I don’t know what this gives that a film camera with slide film loaded doesn’t. Both cameras still allow “staging” a scene and taking a shot of that. Both cameras will both say that the scene was shot in the physical world, but that’s it. I would argue that slide film is more “verifiable” in the ways that matter: easier to explain to laypeople how slide film works, and it’s them that you want to convince. If I was a…
Are you saying the slide itself would be proof? I think the use cases are different - this camera gives you a file and signature you can transmit digitally.
Re: Roc Camera
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
What proof is there that the photo scanner is scanning a genuine photo and not something AI generated that looks like a Polaroid?
What proof is there that this camera is photographing a genuine scene? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cottingley_Fairies
[deleted]
Re: Roc Camera
#100If you are taking the photo yourself, you know where they come from. While would you need signed pictures to prove that?
Instagram could have a "real" filter that only shows you photos with proofs, for instance. So not your own photos, but other people's photos.