photo free association

[phobrain]

I find combinations of photos exciting. Since I was getting overwhelmed spreading prints and slides all over the place when putting albums and slide shows together, I've been playing with image matching algorithms to propose interesting pairs. Here is a series of 3 successive best matches from the first pic, selected from a pool of 6000 pics using the Sift algorithm with 1000 'words' or features it can match:

I just pasted some URL's for images I just put on the site, but they look broken. It's inconvenient to have to upload the pics to include as URLs rather than doing it directly. Broken in preview too. I'll just post this and see if there's any useful feedback.

 

[robbins.photo]

Ok, well can't see the images so no feedback there. But just a wild guess, you don't happen to be the guy that developed this new miracle photo matching software and thought maybe you'd try to drum up some business for it by chance?

 

[phobrain]

So much for the friendly response. Is there anyone helpful around?

Some people seem to really have their buttons pushed by the idea of using using science-ish stuff like image matching software on images. Someday I expect it will be as normal as image editing software is now. I do have a personal, non-commercial site, but wasn't planning on pushing it, since other sites don't like that.

Oddly I just get excited about this stuff and want to discuss it, but that creates the danger that people might like it, I guess.

 

[tirediron]

This is the "Welcome and Introductions" forum where new members normally introduce themselves and existing members extend welcomes and cordial greetings. Your first post sounds suspiciously like you're pushing an agenda, so perhaps you could tell us a little more about yourself, your photography, etc first?

 

[robbins.photo]

So much for the friendly response. Is there anyone helpful around?

Some people seem to really have their buttons pushed by the idea of using using science-ish stuff like image matching software on images. Someday I expect it will be as normal as image editing software is now. I do have a personal, non-commercial site, but wasn't planning on pushing it, since other sites don't like that.

Oddly I just get excited about this stuff and want to discuss it, but that creates the danger that people might like it, I guess.

So I guess the answer to are you the guy that developed the software is a big yes...

Ok, so welcome to the Forum then.. may I be very helpful in pointing out that the forum rules specifically forbid this sort of advertising unless you are a sponsor?

Also, might I try to be even more helpful in pointing out that for a lot of us software like this would serve pretty much no legitimate purpose? Or would that be considered too helpful?

As for all this newfangled sciency stuff, hey, I'm ok with that. In fact just recently I replaced my rotary dial phone with one of those newfangled push button deals. I've even been seriously considering replacing my VHS machine with one of those DVD players I've heard so much about...

But in all seriousness, if you are here to talk photography great, welcome. Glad to have you. If your here just to try and be the next guy in a very long line of guys trying to use the board for free advertising and trying to sell me something, eh..

 

[phobrain]

Sure. I was trying to introduce myself by showing an example, since my ideas seem to be anathema to many. I totally have an agenda, which is to discuss image matching. E.g. I'd love to see a thread where people post picture combos like what I've attempted to do. That should be sufficient. Ultimately it would be cool if other people got into algorithms so we could compare methods etc. like for the rest of photography. So far unfortunately for me, I seem to be the first one doing it, so there is no obvious place to discuss it other than general photography forums. I'm getting a consistent objection that since I could profit off it, it should not be discussed, so I was trying to keep it focused on specific matches and not mention the site at all. If it makes anyone feel any better, no one including my family wants to go back to the site once they have seen it

General photo intro: I took a lot of pics with film, ending up with an EOS 3, and have stayed with Canon for my digital cameras. I have done mostly street photography, and used to consider myself a fine art photographer since I look for compositions based on many hours spent looking at art, hence the interest in matching pics esthetically. I scanned slides with a Sprintscan 4000, and got into combining images in interesting ways for albums and slide shows. Finding myself running out of brain power to manage all the connections I was making, I put serious photography aside for 10 years, while thinking on and off of a solution that as a programmer I might implement. Eventually I had a chance to spend a year on a solution that feels like mining gold as unexpected combinations present themselves from the 6500 pics I've got in the database at the moment, the most remarkable recent being the ones I tried to post, which you can see in my area I suppose. I don't expose this 'pure' best-of-algorithm matching ability directly on my site, rather I incorporate a bunch of such algorithms and other ideas to try to create an artificial intelligence that speaks a language of pictures, but you didn't want to hear about that, did you

The craziness all started for me with getting into the 'friction' one can feel when considering images together, and that experience at least seems like something that some people can understand, so that's what I'm advocating for discussion. It's an extension of analyzing compositions, so if folk indulge in that here, it seems like there could be room to discuss specific examples.

 

[phobrain]

<chest.beat>robbins.photo</chest.beat>

 

[robbins.photo]

<chest.beat>robbins.photo</chest.beat>

Ok, so you come into the forum with a pretty obvious attempt to circumvent the rules and plug your software for sale. Yup, called you on it.

But hey, feel free to play the victim card. I got nothing but time.

As for the rest, maybe the reason no one else thought of doing this "matching" algorithm is that it pretty much serves no viable purpose. See to me, and too a lot of others, photographs tell a story. Your algorithm can't access the story behind a photograph. So it would be impossible for it to match anything.

Even more basic, for a pro photographer, well his clients are going to choose which shots they want, so matching is pointless. The pro would show the client the shots they took and ask the client to pick the ones they want.

For us amateurs, well I don't need software for matching because what would I use it for? Why do I need 3 images that supposedly "match" according to your algorithm?

 

[phobrain]

Thanks for the feedback, hostile though it might be. It sounds like you'd be opposed in principle to even looking at specific matches that other people might find interesting, and you want me to stop talking about it because there might be a commercial application? Or because there wouldn't be?

It reminds me of how people didn't 'need' email when they first heard about it - why look at something you don't need? Why look at photos when paintings do the job?

Your fear seems irrational to me. I don't even have a way of collecting money for my site, for example. And I'm only mentioning the site because others have brought it up. Please try to read what I have actually written here.

 

[robbins.photo]

Thanks for the feedback, hostile though it might be. It sounds like you'd be opposed in principle to even looking at specific matches that other people might find interesting, and you want me to stop talking about it because there might be a commercial application?

It reminds me of how people didn't 'need' email when they first heard about it - why look at something you don't need? Why look at photos when paintings do the job?

Your fear seems irrational to me. I don't even have a way of collecting money for my site, for example. And I'm only mentioning the site because others have brought it up. Please try to read what I have actually written here.

Ok, well do you need a tissue of some sort? Lol

You keep acting like anyone that doesn't go gaga over this notion is some technical neophyte, which frankly most people would interpret as "hostile" on your part.

But so far at least you still haven't answered some very basic questions. So, lets try again shall we? First, your concept seems to be way off base. No matter what criteria you use to "match" images, the truth is you can't match what actually matters, and that's the story behind the photograph itself.

The second and even more important question, so your software "matches" images. But.. what good is that exactly? What is the purpose behind these matches? Why would I ever need 3 images, or 4 images, or 5 images that according to your software "match"? And if I have no need of that, why in Hades would I ever buy a copy no matter how cleverly you try to hide your true intent?

 

[480sparky37 36]

I think there should be software to produce 15-EV, 10-frame focus stacked 180x360° VR videos.

 

[phobrain]

Mr gorilla, did you ever consider that all software, unavailable though it might be, is not targeted for your consumption? Are you primate enough to actually look at the example pics in my Sift 1 folder and see if they are interesting to you and comment on why or why not?

 

[phobrain]

480sparky, as a programmer I can only say, the more software the better!

 

[Overread13 1]

1) I remind users that if you believe a rule is being broken to REPORT the content for the mod/admin team to deal with rather than back-seat moderate. There is no need to start fights or arguments.

2) I remind users that we do have rules against general advertising practice without prior agreement with the administration staff.

3) I don't know why but for some reason the images in the first post are not appearing even though they are hosted on the forums own galleries. I'm unsure if this is the OP doing something wrong or if there's a potential glitch in our software. I have edited the original starting post to have the images appear now.

4) It is not made clear by the op and due to the nature of the thread at present I would request to know if the photos in the opening post are your own or not. I ask because you make mention of photo archives but not specific mention that the photos are your own - as we have rules against hosting/embedding photos that are not your own work (we require such images to be linked to rather than embedded or hosted on site)


At present there is no commercial angle on the content posted thus far and as such this thread will be left open for the purpose of software discussion relating to image sorting software algorithms. Any perceived breach of rules must be reported - the previous argument is now over and shall not be resumed.

 

[phobrain]

1)
4) It is not made clear by the op and due to the nature of the thread at present I would request to know if the photos in the opening post are your own or not. I ask because you make mention of photo archives but not specific mention that the photos are your own - as we have rules against hosting/embedding photos that are not your own work (we require such images to be linked to rather than embedded or hosted on site)

The pics are mine. Thanks for intervention and fixing links. I just copied them from the browser, and a link to another site failed too.

PS - I hope the topic can be broadened to include examples of manual matches too.