What if someone take the photo of the forged photo displayed on another device, doesn’t the forged photo become an authentic one?
Sure, if it’s believable that the shot was perfectly flat at, what, 2 feet away?
Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography
31–40 of 359 posts
Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography
#32Apple doesn't address the modified photo replay situation, where you take a picture of an already edited image. Photoshop / AI-gen an image -> display on a high-resolution monitor -> photograph the monitor with iPhone 18 Pro -> valid Apple Reference image. To get valid reference photos, you can go to the actual physical location, put the iPhone/monitor in a cardboard box to block external light, then photograph the m…
It's less about proving a photo's truth than about attesting it.
Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "But that's not the problem they're trying to solve." It is the problem that they say they're trying to solve, though. They specifically say "where the essential role of a photograph is to prove that something actually happened". It fails the reasonable person test to say that the "something" in that phrase refers to the act of taking the photo itself. Likewise in "distinguish between photographs that depict real e…
So, in your view, photography has been fatally flawed since the late 1800’s, and mere mitigation of AI image gen are insufficient if they don’t also solve actors impersonating real people?
[flagged]
Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "But that's not the problem they're trying to solve." It is the problem that they say they're trying to solve, though. They specifically say "where the essential role of a photograph is to prove that something actually happened". It fails the reasonable person test to say that the "something" in that phrase refers to the act of taking the photo itself. Likewise in "distinguish between photographs that depict real e…
This is so stupid. This makes it like, a thousand times harder to fake a photo than it would otherwise be. You pedants imagining a way to fake it doesn't change that.
> This makes it like, a thousand times harder to fake a photo than it would otherwise be.
The problem with this thinking is twofold:
1) Whether it actually meaningfully increases the difficulty of a forgery remains to be seen. Despite their initial language about discerning real events, we see no details here about what scene information is used.
2) It increases the potential value of a forgery because now your forgery is attested by Apple.
So it either makes it easier to defraud people or more worthwhile to put in the effort to defraud people or both. None of those outcomes are great.
Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography
#35so what happens if you display an extremely high res image of a 100% AI generated fake-something on an 8K display in a photo studio room and take a picture of it with the camera? it gets tagged as authentic.
Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography
#36[dead]
Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography
#37Apple doesn't address the modified photo replay situation, where you take a picture of an already edited image. Photoshop / AI-gen an image -> display on a high-resolution monitor -> photograph the monitor with iPhone 18 Pro -> valid Apple Reference image. To get valid reference photos, you can go to the actual physical location, put the iPhone/monitor in a cardboard box to block external light, then photograph the m…
> Paint the inside of the box using Vantablack
But you're only allowed to do that if your name if Anish Kapoor
Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography
#38The fundamental issue isn't technical. It's that people will see the "certified real" tag and just take the image for face value of whatever narrative someone wants to convey. They'll see the "Real Photo, Verified by Apple" and their brain will short circuit [0]
I don't think we should have this, for that reason alone (but many others too).
Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography
#39Seems kind of concerning that using this at all means you send your image to Apple’s PCC machines.
Re: Apple Reference Image: A New Approach for Verified Photography
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Claim 7 in this patent application describes how depth sensors are used as part of an image authentication process, which would make such a workaround more difficult: https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloa... The Apple Reference Image feature is here launched on iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max that both have built-in LiDAR sensors that could be used for this process.
Apple's current implementation doesn't integrate LiDAR. And LiDAR wouldn't be enough here, it's trivial to block the projector and hide the dot pattern. No dot pattern = iPhone thinks the object is far away, which is what happens in landscape photos. A better fix is to take photos with all three iPhone cameras simultaneously, ideally as a 2-3s video, and use the parallax/multiple perspectives to extract depth informa…
Right but I’d argue that realistically this feature is going to be most useful when taking photos of things reasonably close by, people especially, rather than landscape photography.