this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2023
257 points (82.0% liked)

Technology

58713 readers
4126 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A U.K. woman was photographed standing in a mirror where her reflections didn't match, but not because of a glitch in the Matrix. Instead, it's a simple iPhone computational photography mistake.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jtk@lemmy.sdf.org 45 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Who wants photos of a fake reality? Might as well just AI generate them.

[–] LifeInOregon@lemmy.world 47 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Generally the final photo is an accurate representation of a moment. Everything in this photo happened. It’s not really generating anything that wasn’t there. You can sometimes get similar results by exploiting the rolling shutter effect.

https://camerareviews.com/rolling-shutter/

It’s not like they’re superimposing an image of the moon over a night sky photo to fake astrophotography or something.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee -5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)
[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 23 points 10 months ago (3 children)

A photo is a fake reality. It's a capture of the world from the perspective of a camera that no person has ever seen.

Sure we can approximate with viewfinders and colour match as much as possible but it's not reality. Take a photo of a light bulb, versus look at a light bulb, as one obvious example.

This is just one other way to get less consistency in the time of different parts of the photos, but overall better capture what we want to see in a photo.

[–] Gabu@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Your argument makes literally no sense. You're, baselessly, assuming a person's perspective is a prism of reality. There's no such a thing - in fact, I'd rather trust reality as being detected by the sensors of a camera, with their known flaws, attributes and parameters, than trust the biological sensors at the back of your eyes or the biological wiring to the inside of your skull.

[–] Roastchicken@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Case point: https://youtu.be/UtKt8YF7dgQ?si=G-ni_azX0PYtfUBg And other selective attention demonstrations. People are unreliable and easily manipulated.

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 10 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://piped.video/UtKt8YF7dgQ?si=G-ni_azX0PYtfUBg

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 4 points 10 months ago

Yes, but that's the reality from the perspective of the camera, which will be slightly different from a perspective of the person operating it.

If the camera is out of focus, is that more or less accurate than a phone camera choosing the least out of focus frame, even if half a second after you clicked?

There is no objective reality in pictures or photos or art, only what we perceive. We now value real life activity shots. When cameras needed long exposure, it was still life portrait by necessity. Both show different versions of reality.

Again, you're saying that the camera has flaws, ergo it's imperfect, but in a known way. It's the same for phone photos. They are imperfect but in a known way that leads to more frequent desirable pics.

[–] lemann@lemmy.one 1 points 10 months ago

I agree with this comment but I don't like it 😤

[–] dan1101@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

However I think most cameras and most people traditionally have wanted the most accurate photos possible. If the camera is outputting fiction that can be a big problem.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 4 points 10 months ago

Oh, dear. No, in most cases people seem to want the prettiest photos possible. Otherwise digital filters wouldn't be so popular.

[–] Chozo@kbin.social 17 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

To their credit, it's not "fake". This isn't from generative AI, this is from AI picking from multiple different exposures of the same shot and stitching various parts of them together to create the "best" version of the photo.

Everything seen in the photo was still 100% captured in-lens. Just... not at the exact same time.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)
[–] ByGourou@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago

It's not the case as someone already explained, but also, who care about the photo being fake ? People take photos to show to other people and keep a memory, and that photo looking better than reality is usually not an issue. I would still prefer choice with a toggle somewhere, which we will never get with an Apple product.

[–] jdrch@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

My take exactly.