4 ms·

There is another problem with such technology that is missing from this long article. Facial recognition et al. also excludes those with physical disabilities.

by crocal 8y ago

There is another problem with such technology that is missing from this long article. Facial recognition et al. also excludes those with physical disabilities. For example, some people have facial injuries that make it impossible and/or painful for them to look “straight” in a mirror. A reason why, for instance, I abhorre the 3D movies is that I can’t take my wife in movies because she lost binocular vision. We are creating a society where technology is used to filter out people that can’t conform to a given physical standard. I find it revolting and we hackers should fight to our last breath against it. Edit: typo

undreren 8y ago
Movies in 3D might not be accessible to everyone, but that doesn't mean it should be accessible noone. I agree to your general point, but not this specific one.
- crocal 8y ago
  I understand what you mean. I should have explained that my temper flares when 3D is the only option offered, or when the 2D option is given at impossible hours.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - undreren 8y ago
    As I commented on the other reply, I wasn't aware that this was a problem. Personally, I really dislike 3D movies and wouldn't go to one unless invited.
- ahje 8y ago
  While you're absolutely right in a general sense, the local theatres here (and most likely elsewhere too) simply don't license the 2D-version of some movies, thus preventing myself and other people who only see in 2D for whatever reason from watching those movies.
  - undreren 8y ago
    That was not a problem, I was aware of. That seems pretty annoying.
  - jasonlotito 8y ago
    I've honestly never seen that. I've always seen options for both. Where do you live where the only theaters show 3D only?
  - BurritoAlPastor 8y ago
    That's actually quite unusual. As of last year, 3D tickets accounted for less than a third of the tickets sold for 3D movies: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/is-golden-age-3d-officially-1025843 https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/is-golden-ag... (They cite about one-third 3D, but they're counting box gross, and 3D tickets are usually about... +20% price?) Speaking anecdotally from when I worked in a theater, somewhere around one in five people either can't watch 3D movies (motion sickness or similar) or simply don't benefit (no depth perception). Parties of four or more would almost always go to a 2D showing, because of the likelihood that somebody would veto 3D.
emiliobumachar 8y ago
Please excuse my ignorance. Is 3D a worse experience for people with monocular vision, beyond having to wear the glasses for no benefit? I would imagine it just automatically degrades to 2D.
- swsieber 8y ago
  I have the same question! If it doesn't degrade quickly (edit: nicely), I bet you could do a crowdfunded campaign to produce glasses that show the same eye (side?) to both eyes. I'd support it.
  - crocal 8y ago
    I understand your curiosity and I gave an attempt at answer above. Your idea is intriguing. I will think about it...
- crocal 8y ago
  I will try to convey what only disabled people can convey to the best of my abilities. First, with one image you lose a lot of luminosity with the glasses on. Without the glasses, off course, it is unwatchable. Furthermore, and more subtle, many people like my partner have /partial/ paralysis, so they have trained their brain in a certain way to compensate for the fact that they have partial binocular vision. The 3D effect don’t tolerate that since they rely on two images precisely engineered to trick your binocular vision « brain algorithm ». All this put together make 3D movies a «no-go » for people with monocular or partial binocular vision. Edit: Typo and better explanation of the « trick »
  - Majestic121 8y ago
    I don't really get your point, a lot of existing things are "no-go" for people with disabilities. Skiing is impossible if you can't use your legs. Going to the movie is pretty much a no-go if you're blind (I know audiodescription exists for some movies) There should be options for people with disabilities of course, and AFAIK 2D movies still exists and are not going to die anytime soon. But what are you debating for ? Do you want a global ban on 3D because it can not be enjoyed by everyone ?
bsenftner 8y ago
Perhaps the facial recognition written in undergraduate or even graduate classes does not handle physical disabilities (I think you're talking about non-standard faces, in this context.) Actual professional FR systems must handle conventional appearances, as well as individuals with birth defect deformities, significant facial scarring from injury such as fire, facial tattoos and jewelry, as well as outright attempts to disguise. When talking society population, the proportion of people with non-conventional appearances is significant. BTW, I'm lead engineer of a leading FR system.
Doxin 8y ago
> I abhorre the 3D movies So do I. Give your local movie theater a call and ask if they have 2d glasses. My local theater does and it's a godsent. (it's basically just 3d glasses except with the left lens twice)
- crocal 8y ago
  A reason why HN rocks is that you can learn things like this. I will follow your advice!

by crocal 8y ago

undreren 8y ago

Movies in 3D might not be accessible to everyone, but that doesn't mean it should be accessible noone. I agree to your general point, but not this specific one.

crocal 8y ago
I understand what you mean. I should have explained that my temper flares when 3D is the only option offered, or when the 2D option is given at impossible hours.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- undreren 8y ago
  As I commented on the other reply, I wasn't aware that this was a problem. Personally, I really dislike 3D movies and wouldn't go to one unless invited.
ahje 8y ago
While you're absolutely right in a general sense, the local theatres here (and most likely elsewhere too) simply don't license the 2D-version of some movies, thus preventing myself and other people who only see in 2D for whatever reason from watching those movies.
- undreren 8y ago
  That was not a problem, I was aware of. That seems pretty annoying.
- jasonlotito 8y ago
  I've honestly never seen that. I've always seen options for both. Where do you live where the only theaters show 3D only?
- BurritoAlPastor 8y ago
  That's actually quite unusual. As of last year, 3D tickets accounted for less than a third of the tickets sold for 3D movies: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/is-golden-age-3d-officially-1025843 https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/is-golden-ag... (They cite about one-third 3D, but they're counting box gross, and 3D tickets are usually about... +20% price?) Speaking anecdotally from when I worked in a theater, somewhere around one in five people either can't watch 3D movies (motion sickness or similar) or simply don't benefit (no depth perception). Parties of four or more would almost always go to a 2D showing, because of the likelihood that somebody would veto 3D.

emiliobumachar 8y ago

Please excuse my ignorance. Is 3D a worse experience for people with monocular vision, beyond having to wear the glasses for no benefit? I would imagine it just automatically degrades to 2D.

swsieber 8y ago
I have the same question! If it doesn't degrade quickly (edit: nicely), I bet you could do a crowdfunded campaign to produce glasses that show the same eye (side?) to both eyes. I'd support it.
- crocal 8y ago
  I understand your curiosity and I gave an attempt at answer above. Your idea is intriguing. I will think about it...
crocal 8y ago
I will try to convey what only disabled people can convey to the best of my abilities. First, with one image you lose a lot of luminosity with the glasses on. Without the glasses, off course, it is unwatchable. Furthermore, and more subtle, many people like my partner have /partial/ paralysis, so they have trained their brain in a certain way to compensate for the fact that they have partial binocular vision. The 3D effect don’t tolerate that since they rely on two images precisely engineered to trick your binocular vision « brain algorithm ». All this put together make 3D movies a «no-go » for people with monocular or partial binocular vision. Edit: Typo and better explanation of the « trick »
- Majestic121 8y ago
  I don't really get your point, a lot of existing things are "no-go" for people with disabilities. Skiing is impossible if you can't use your legs. Going to the movie is pretty much a no-go if you're blind (I know audiodescription exists for some movies) There should be options for people with disabilities of course, and AFAIK 2D movies still exists and are not going to die anytime soon. But what are you debating for ? Do you want a global ban on 3D because it can not be enjoyed by everyone ?

bsenftner 8y ago

Perhaps the facial recognition written in undergraduate or even graduate classes does not handle physical disabilities (I think you're talking about non-standard faces, in this context.) Actual professional FR systems must handle conventional appearances, as well as individuals with birth defect deformities, significant facial scarring from injury such as fire, facial tattoos and jewelry, as well as outright attempts to disguise. When talking society population, the proportion of people with non-conventional appearances is significant. BTW, I'm lead engineer of a leading FR system.

Doxin 8y ago

> I abhorre the 3D movies So do I. Give your local movie theater a call and ask if they have 2d glasses. My local theater does and it's a godsent. (it's basically just 3d glasses except with the left lens twice)

crocal 8y ago
A reason why HN rocks is that you can learn things like this. I will follow your advice!