Can you spot a fake? Are you sure?

[HughGuessWho]

Can you spot a fake? Are you sure?

Look and see...

Photorealistic 3D Images - Business Insider

What are peoples opinion (fake or no fake) on the huge wave photo:

Biggest storm of the year sweeps Britain off its feet with flooding, gales and lightning strikes | Mail Online

Like the guy flying in the wind? Yeah. right.

 

[spacefuzz]

Yeah, there are some that have clear signs.

But the white bedroom, bread shot, leather couch and the toy car?

I'm willing to guarantee if those were posted here for C+C instead of prefaced with "which one of these are digital fakes", no one, no matter how experienced would have picked out that they were fake.

I just think I play too many video games and use a lot of CAD.......so Im used to seeing that rendered "look".
If you applied a smoothing filter to some photos and threw them into the mix, like out of Nik color effects, then I doubt I would be able to tell.

 

[duhast]

Can you spot a fake? Are you sure?

Look and see...

Photorealistic 3D Images - Business Insider

We are so screwed. Wait until the White House Press Office gets a hold of it. We can now be sold a complete bill of goods by anyone about anything. A picture is now not worth a thousand words, it is a complete and total lie. This is not good news.

 

[Ballistics]

I was referring to photojournalism specifically.

And yes, many product shots are already CGI such as those car advertisements where the car is in an unlikely place such as a boxing ring.

I know, hence why I mentioned the Presidential Inauguration. But not necessarily that it would do away with photojournalism, but photojournalism may be tough to believe eventually.

Photoshop has already made that a reality. But it would be hard for a newspaper to CGI an inauguration beforehand or during considering that news nowadays is more about the scoop than the story itself.

I don't think that at this time 3D models can be create quickly enough to satisfy the instant gratification culture. Since wire service are now online and he Associated Press is as well, newspapers can purchase photos and news at a bargain.

It would be both unethical and impractical.

I don't know about impractical.

Photoshop has made it a reality, but you need a photo to begin with. But you're kind of going a long with my point with photojournalism being unbelievable eventually.
Being unethical is a concern for people who are ethical. If someone wants to slander another, they can hire a good CGI designer to create an individual doing anything they want.

The question is, how quickly can someone render an individual image?

 

[TCampbell]

Canon used to sell an accessory product called the "Original Data Security Kit" OSK-E3. It was a special memory card, reader, and software which "digitally signed" images as they were taken (and if you had a GPS accessory on the camera it would also include date/time/location info that would be signed as well. It was created for forensic images... if you had to _prove_ an image was NOT faked, photoshop'd or enhanced in anyway... what you see is what the camera saw.

I don't think they make it anymore.

The images on that site are _really_ impressive. After looking at a few, I kept going back to re-read the intro... because I was having a hard time believing _all_ of them were fakes. A few were, as others have said, just a little too good... the window scene with the cracked pain had cracking that was just too perfect. An aged neglected window never looks so evenly crackled. The table of breads was very impressive.

 

[amolitor]

Can you spot a fake? Are you sure?

Look and see...

Photorealistic 3D Images - Business Insider

We are so screwed. Wait until the White House Press Office gets a hold of it. We can now be sold a complete bill of goods by anyone about anything. A picture is now not worth a thousand words, it is a complete and total lie. This is not good news.

Really? You think you need photoshop or digital renders to lie with pictures? You can lie with a crop (considered perfectly "legitimate" by All The Best News Agencies) as with an erasure, or a render. And they DO lie with crops, all the time.

 

[Buckster]

The question is, how quickly can someone render an individual image?

Probably depends on whether all the objects they want to render for a particular scene are already in their CGI library of objects, ready to be re-used in new scenes. They each only need to be made once. As the libraries grow and CPU power increases, rendering scenes should happen faster and faster for those in the business of doing that sort of thing.

 

[duhast]

Can you spot a fake? Are you sure?

Look and see...

Photorealistic 3D Images - Business Insider

We are so screwed. Wait until the White House Press Office gets a hold of it. We can now be sold a complete bill of goods by anyone about anything. A picture is now not worth a thousand words, it is a complete and total lie. This is not good news.

Really? You think you need photoshop or digital renders to lie with pictures? You can lie with a crop (considered perfectly "legitimate" by All The Best News Agencies) as with an erasure, or a render. And they DO lie with crops, all the time.

Sure, I know that. The recent 'polar bears on melting ice cap' comes to mind. I'm talking about complete fabrication though, let's say someones murder, or even the existence of 'aliens'. But you have a good point. This just further shows the falseness of the idea of 'unbiased media'. There is no such thing. All news is biased somehow.

 

[timor]

Digital technology makes faking very easy and to say shortly: is not the problem what is not on the picture (regarding crop), problem is what's on the picture.

 

[pixmedic]

its so hard to spot fakes now...
they look so natural, and there's almost no scarring.
isn't technology wonderful

 

[timor]

isn't technology wonderful

Depens on the point of view.