Deep Fakes and Implications for Photography

[mrca]

flying, please cite where PPA does that. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? I haven't judged for them in over 10 years, but don't remember ever hearing that. I was in charge of their mentor program before I relocated and I certainly didn't teach that. What is wrong with batch processing? I use a color checker passport and batch process each group of images under the same lighting condition. It enables me to get a consistent starting point on white balance and get the colors dead on. That kind of precision doesn't happen in camera. Nor in camera do I have the precision to add a specific amount of warming to images from that baseline. Someone who doesn't have a clue would never appreciate the consistent color across a range of images. I wish all the novices who either don't know photoshop or don't use it, would take a class before condemning it. They call it cheating because edited images will almost always look better than straight out of camera and they hate it that they cant produce such quality. And if they shoot jpeg, they have already let the camera computer EDIT the image. If the shoot raw and don't edit, their images are flat, have poor contrast, color and sharpness. Usually these people are collectors not photographers so would never call someone using a 12 grand 400 mm 2.8 to photo pro football cheating when they can't match it with their kit lens. Remember the quote, you don't know what you don't know. Why do these people think they are qualified to preach about what is acceptable and not. Reminds me of the Inherit the Wind movie quote, God speaks to Brady and brady tells the world. I wish the photo gods would speak to me too. Why don't the anti PS folks, show us your IMAGES that document how unedited images can consistently be high quality. And no jpeg camera edited captures, only raw captures.

 

[limr]

Oh, y'all.

This was a 3-year-old thread about legal ramifications of new photo editing abilities for creating fake images, and it was revived to be YET ANOTHER discussion on the relative merits of editing and the evils of social media.

Could we at least stay on subject for this particular thread, or if you feel like beating dead horses, find a newer thread on topic or start a new one? K thx!

 

[mrca]

Limr, I agree. We seem to have some newer members who reopen dozens of years old posts by just tossing in an outlandish grenade often off topic that would surely provoke a response. I noticed it daily with 3 or 4 such posts a day on ancient threads when it first started happening.

 

[Space Face]

Limr, I agree. We seem to have some newer members who reopen dozens of years old posts by just tossing in an outlandish grenade often off topic that would surely provoke a response. I noticed it daily with 3 or 4 such posts a day on ancient threads when it first started happening.

Seems to be the same culprit/s time after time with very few if any actual photographs being posted. All the knowledge (allegedly) but no examples of that knowledge being evidenced. All mouth and no trousers as we'd say here in the UK.

 

[mrca]

Space here, a cowboy would say all hat and no cattle.

 

[smoke665]

by just tossing in an outlandish grenade often off topic that would surely provoke a response

And like a moth drawn to the flame, here we are.....


Back on topic. I know this is an old thread but the technology has gained momentum. Where I see the issue is that those familiar with PS or other similar software have been able to do sophisticated editing for some time, but the more recent advances and introduction of AI in the mix has opened the ability up to the masses. Many of whom likely have no interest other than the novelty. Yes those experienced can still catch the tells on an edited image, but in the click through world of social media, most wouldn't.

For those that haven't had the opportunity to use the latest release of the Neural Filters in PS, I'd highly recommend you try them. They still have a ways to go but it's scary how good they already are. https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/neural-filters.html Here's an example, Mona Happy.....Mona not. LOL

 

[Space Face]

Space here, a cowboy would say all hat and no cattle.

Same thing I suppose. Nice one.

 

[mrca]

Space, yes, meaning is the guy has the hat like he's a cowboy or rancher, but has no cattle, ie, a poser.

 

[Space Face]

Space, yes, meaning is the guy has the hat like he's a cowboy or rancher, but has no cattle, ie, a poser.

Yeah, speaks a good game without the balls to back it up.

 

[limr]

And this is supposed to be staying on topic? Let's give it a rest.

 

[vintagesnaps]

If nothing else I picked up a couple of new sayings...