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.
Saved you a click
https://photos5.appleinsider.com/gallery/57517-117166-bride-trio-xl.jpg
e0qdk@kbin.social 11 months ago
This story may be amusing, but it's actually a serious issue if Apple is doing this and people are not aware of it because cellphone imagery is used in things like court cases. Relative positions of people in a scene really fucking matter in those kinds of situations. Someone's photo of a crime could be dismissed or discredited using this exact news story as an example -- or worse, someone could be wrongly convicted because the composite produced a misleading representation of the scene.
falkerie71@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
I see your point, though I wouldn’t put it that far. It’s an edge case that has to happen in a very short duration.
Similar effects can be acheived with traditional cameras with rolling shutter.
If you’re only concerned of relative positions of different people during a time frame, I don’t think you need to be that worried. Being aware of it is enough.
Odelay42@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I don’t think that’s what’s happening. I think Apple is “filming” over the course of the seconds you have the camera open, and uses the press of the shutter button to select a specific shit from the hundreds of frames that have been taken as video. Then, some algorithm appears to be assembling different portions of those shots into one “best” shot.
It’s not just a mechanical shutter effect.
curiousaur@reddthat.com 11 months ago
It should be. All computational photography has zero business being used in court
ElderWendigo@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
All digital photography is computational. I think the word your looking for is composite, not computational.
Decoy321@lemmy.world 11 months ago
We might be exaggerating the issue here. Fallibility has always been an issue with court evidence. Analog photos can be doctored too.
Blackmist@feddit.uk 11 months ago
With all the image manipulation and generation tools available to even amateurs, I’m not sure how any photography is admissible as evidence these days.
At some point there’s going to have to be a whole bunch of digital signing (and timestamp signatures) going on inside the camera for things to be even considered.
Blackmist@feddit.uk 11 months ago
I’m still waiting for the first time somebody uses it to zoom in on a car number plate and it helpfully fills it in with some AI bullshit with something else entirely.
We’ve already seen such a thing with image compression.
zdnet.com/…/xerox-scanners-alter-numbers-in-scann…
ook_the_librarian@lemmy.world 11 months ago
This was important in the Kyle Rittenhouse case. The zoom resolution was interpolated by software. It wasn’t AI per se, but the fact that a jury couldn’t be relied upon to understand a black box algorithm and its possible artifacts, the zoomed video was disallowed.
(this in no way implies that I agree with the court.)
Jarix@lemmy.world 11 months ago
This isn’t an issue at all it’s a bullshit headline. And it worked.
This is the result of shooting in panorama mode.
In other news, the sky is blue
Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Like, an episode of Bones or some shit.