5 ms·
Signs that can reveal a fake photo
- Karunamon 9y agoThere's a YouTuber by the name of Captain Disillusion that has a series of debunking fake videos, using many of the same techniques described here. Where it really gets cool is that he does video work for a living, and in many cases can even tell you what special effects and stock images from the software library were specifically used. It's great stuff. Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsXQInxxzBU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsXQInxxzBU
- qrbLPHiKpiux 9y agoThis is eye opening to see the tricks used all in getting you to give someone your money.
- TazeTSchnitzel 9y agoRegarding JPEG compression, there used to be a site that would make a heatmap of JPEG-induced noise for a given image, so you could see hotspots where it looked like it had been compressed twice (i.e. manipulated).
- Nanite 9y agoThis one by any chance? https://29a.ch/photo-forensics/#forensic-magnifier https://29a.ch/photo-forensics/#forensic-magnifier
- pacaro 9y agothis is fun! It's noteworthy that the first image in TFA doesn't have obvious signs of tampering in that tool
- joshu 9y agoELA? Error Level Analysis?
- joecool1029 9y ago>ELA? Error Level Analysis? Yeah, that was it. They shut it down but still have an info page on it: http://www.errorlevelanalysis.com/ http://www.errorlevelanalysis.com/
- eli 9y agoIt's easy to spoof if you try though, so it only works to detect unsophisticated forgeries.
- TazeTSchnitzel 9y agoThat's the one I was thinking of, yes.
- johansch 9y agoThis is surprisingly good stuff (for being a bbc.com article - they tend to be overly light on details).
- contingencies 9y agoGreat to read the government or other criminal groups in a BBC article!
- pcunite 9y agoCheck out Real-time Face Capture and Reenactment: https://youtu.be/ohmajJTcpNk https://youtu.be/ohmajJTcpNk
- ams6110 9y agoExperts can still spot these clues -- for now. How much longer before better tools can create altered images/videos that correct for all these defects? Aligning shadows/reflections seems like something that software should be able to do. I think that within the decade, photo/video "evidence" will be something that can be legitimately questioned unless there's some kind of cryptographic proof that it hasn't been altered. Cameras will need to "sign" their images, perhaps?
- acomjean 9y agoCanon (probably others) have "verification kits" for using digital photography as evidence. This is to verify images haven't been tweaked after the fact. Not sure exactly how it works, but canon at least seems to require the high end 1 series cameras, presumably signing the images.. from the press release: "The kit consists of a dedicated SM (secure mobile) card reader/writer and verification software. When the appropriate function (Personal Function 31) on the EOS-1D Mark II or EOS-1Ds is activated, a code based on the image contents is generated and appended to the image. When the image is viewed, the data verification software determines the code for the image and compares it with the attached code. If the image contents have been manipulated in any way, the codes will not match and the image cannot be verified as the original." https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3146736527/canondvke2 https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3146736527/canondvke2
- weavie 9y agoSurely an easy work around would be to take the picture, doctor it, print it out, point the camera at the print out and snap.
- zzo38computer 9y agoNot sufficient; you will also need to worry about timestamps.
- pvaldes 9y agoAnd with the printer resolution matching the camera
- jameslk 9y agoIt would be interesting if digital cameras would cryptographically sign photos. I'm sure there would be ways around that too (see also DRM arms race). Or at the very least use the photographer's private key to sign the photo. That might not prevent photo manipulation if the photographer wants to manipulate their photo but would prevent others from manipulating it.