7 ms·

Maybe it's time to revert back to[1], or even create a new service that removes the artificial layer of photo sharing... A camera app on your phone, that can't

Maybe it's time to revert back to[1], or even create a new service that removes the artificial layer of photo sharing... A camera app on your phone, that can't access your files, and has no inbuilt filters. You take the photo, and it instantly gets uploaded to the photo sharing service. No editing, no offline photo manipulation. What you shoot, is what what you share. Deleting a previously uploaded photo should be possible, but a deliberately complex affair, to discourage image curating. I doubt anyone would use this kind of app, but it's nice to imagine something like it existing. --- [1] Instagram was originally 'as-shot + filters only' on your phone. Later, they caved and allowed previously shot photos on your camera roll to be uploaded, which led to an abundance of phone photo editing apps, then finally they allowed desktop uploads, and that was the end of what made Instagram different.

threeseed 8y ago
Casey Neistat's Beme app did this but for video. It wasn't a success. It is intrinsic to who we are as humans to want others to see a version of ourselves that we want them to see. It is the reason that fashion and beauty are such large and enduring industries. And so trying to build an app that fights that is never going to work.
- michaelbuckbee 8y ago
  You're right that Beme had many similar elements, but IIRC it was focused outwards - you'd place the phone screen down on your chest triggering it to take a video (or the wall to take a selfie) Demo video: https://youtu.be/mixsze6uJPg?t=101 https://youtu.be/mixsze6uJPg?t=101 What's interesting to me is that IG seems to emphasize a very specific form of "curated authenticity" that's distinct from Beme + taking raw video. Maybe IG's the "Based on a True Story" of social photo apps.
r_c_a_d 8y ago
In the late 1990s I was part of a group that was thinking about how cameras might be able to sign images so that later editing could be detected. The motive then was connected to using images as evidence. But I guess you could also use it to mark edited images in some way. Would apps like Instagram be "improved" if retouched images displayed a prominent "FAKE" icon of some sort?
- arethuza 8y ago
  Maybe include a link from all retouched images to the original.... :-)
- rimliu 8y ago
  No. Would restaurant food be improved if all meals came with "FAKE" sticker, because they do not match the raw ingredients? Even straight out of camera image has been processed _a lot_. I don't really care "how it looked in reality", because what is reality? All that matters is what the photographer wanted to show.
  - alliecat 8y ago
    It's always interesting when people try to Solve Art. Art is inherently subjective, and you have to accept that a lot of it just _sucks_. It's up to you to curate your own taste, and you do that by trawling through the terrible art until you find something that you like.
  - sametmax 8y ago
    I used to no care as well. But the world is heavily influenced by all those fake images. People may know something is fake, yet being exposed to it again and again do change their expectation and behaviour. It's like ad. You think it doesn't work. That you are not that stupid. But eventually, the brute force wins.
- pjc50 8y ago
  What does "fake" mean? Even if you're taking as-camera images (which have already had de-Bayer and some level of dynamic range and denoise processing, which may be considerable and involve machine learning!), then you can't tell what manipulation has been applied to the scene. You can rent little "sets" for taking photography in. Props and clothes can be borrowed. And so on. Authenticity is a product, just like any other. And it's increasingly hard to say what it even means in the 21st century.
  - sevensor 8y ago
    > What does "fake" mean? When my kids asked me why we didn't have a real Christmas tree this year, I told them, "we do have a real Christmas tree. It's made of real plastic and wire."
sschueller 8y ago
That wont work for long. Phone makers are already adding built in "beauty" filters that can't be turned off. [1] [1] https://www.diyphotography.net/iphone-xs-camera-forces-beauty-mode-by-default-and-you-cant-turn-it-off/ https://www.diyphotography.net/iphone-xs-camera-forces-beaut...
- dorian-graph 8y ago
  While I'm sure there are phone makers doing that, the one you're linking appears to have been debunked a while ago. [1] [1] https://blog.halide.cam/iphone-xs-why-its-a-whole-new-camera-ddf9780d714c?gi=571ae9c7d382 https://blog.halide.cam/iphone-xs-why-its-a-whole-new-camera...
- rchaud 8y ago
  Twitter is full of tales of people using the camera filters on their phone to change their appearance on Tinder, Match etc. What do you call body dysmorphia when what you see in the mirror doesn't match what you see on your phone in every Instagram/Snap post of yours?
  - tlynchpin 8y ago
    It might be called 'victim of a crime'. > The term 'deep fake' means an audiovisual record created or altered in a manner that the record would falsely appear to a reasonable observer to be an authentic record of the actual speech or conduct of an individual. from yesterday's discussion of Malicious Deep Fake Prohibition Act of 2018 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19076121 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19076121
    - rchaud 8y ago
      Hah, certainly an interesting interpretation of that law. But 'intent' matters as well, and tech corps can always point to A/B testing, usability testing etc to show what we already know: everyone wants to be healthier, handsomer and richer than they actually are. Social media enables this via a constant feedback loop of our human frailties.
hi5eyes 8y ago
yes there's somewhat of a push for hot girls to have vsco links in their bio but for the most part that trend has died
psychomugs 8y ago
Like it or not, Instagram is the strongest platform for photo sharing at this point since 500px never really took off and Flickr is a raging dumpster fire that refuses to go out. I have 2 Instagram accounts that are basically the last vestiges of my social media presence: one for street photography which is a longstanding hobby of mine, and one for more social-media-y stuff and portraits of friends. Instagram, for better or worse (most definitely worse), is the best way to share these photos with a wider audience whether they're selfies or meticulously-edited photos which would otherwise just sit on a harddrive.

threeseed 8y ago

Casey Neistat's Beme app did this but for video. It wasn't a success. It is intrinsic to who we are as humans to want others to see a version of ourselves that we want them to see. It is the reason that fashion and beauty are such large and enduring industries. And so trying to build an app that fights that is never going to work.

michaelbuckbee 8y ago
You're right that Beme had many similar elements, but IIRC it was focused outwards - you'd place the phone screen down on your chest triggering it to take a video (or the wall to take a selfie) Demo video: https://youtu.be/mixsze6uJPg?t=101 https://youtu.be/mixsze6uJPg?t=101 What's interesting to me is that IG seems to emphasize a very specific form of "curated authenticity" that's distinct from Beme + taking raw video. Maybe IG's the "Based on a True Story" of social photo apps.

r_c_a_d 8y ago

In the late 1990s I was part of a group that was thinking about how cameras might be able to sign images so that later editing could be detected. The motive then was connected to using images as evidence. But I guess you could also use it to mark edited images in some way. Would apps like Instagram be "improved" if retouched images displayed a prominent "FAKE" icon of some sort?

arethuza 8y ago
Maybe include a link from all retouched images to the original.... :-)
rimliu 8y ago
No. Would restaurant food be improved if all meals came with "FAKE" sticker, because they do not match the raw ingredients? Even straight out of camera image has been processed _a lot_. I don't really care "how it looked in reality", because what is reality? All that matters is what the photographer wanted to show.
- alliecat 8y ago
  It's always interesting when people try to Solve Art. Art is inherently subjective, and you have to accept that a lot of it just _sucks_. It's up to you to curate your own taste, and you do that by trawling through the terrible art until you find something that you like.
- sametmax 8y ago
  I used to no care as well. But the world is heavily influenced by all those fake images. People may know something is fake, yet being exposed to it again and again do change their expectation and behaviour. It's like ad. You think it doesn't work. That you are not that stupid. But eventually, the brute force wins.
pjc50 8y ago
What does "fake" mean? Even if you're taking as-camera images (which have already had de-Bayer and some level of dynamic range and denoise processing, which may be considerable and involve machine learning!), then you can't tell what manipulation has been applied to the scene. You can rent little "sets" for taking photography in. Props and clothes can be borrowed. And so on. Authenticity is a product, just like any other. And it's increasingly hard to say what it even means in the 21st century.
- sevensor 8y ago
  > What does "fake" mean? When my kids asked me why we didn't have a real Christmas tree this year, I told them, "we do have a real Christmas tree. It's made of real plastic and wire."

sschueller 8y ago

That wont work for long. Phone makers are already adding built in "beauty" filters that can't be turned off. [1] [1] https://www.diyphotography.net/iphone-xs-camera-forces-beauty-mode-by-default-and-you-cant-turn-it-off/ https://www.diyphotography.net/iphone-xs-camera-forces-beaut...

dorian-graph 8y ago
While I'm sure there are phone makers doing that, the one you're linking appears to have been debunked a while ago. [1] [1] https://blog.halide.cam/iphone-xs-why-its-a-whole-new-camera-ddf9780d714c?gi=571ae9c7d382 https://blog.halide.cam/iphone-xs-why-its-a-whole-new-camera...
rchaud 8y ago
Twitter is full of tales of people using the camera filters on their phone to change their appearance on Tinder, Match etc. What do you call body dysmorphia when what you see in the mirror doesn't match what you see on your phone in every Instagram/Snap post of yours?
- tlynchpin 8y ago
  It might be called 'victim of a crime'. > The term 'deep fake' means an audiovisual record created or altered in a manner that the record would falsely appear to a reasonable observer to be an authentic record of the actual speech or conduct of an individual. from yesterday's discussion of Malicious Deep Fake Prohibition Act of 2018 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19076121 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19076121
  - rchaud 8y ago
    Hah, certainly an interesting interpretation of that law. But 'intent' matters as well, and tech corps can always point to A/B testing, usability testing etc to show what we already know: everyone wants to be healthier, handsomer and richer than they actually are. Social media enables this via a constant feedback loop of our human frailties.

hi5eyes 8y ago

yes there's somewhat of a push for hot girls to have vsco links in their bio but for the most part that trend has died

psychomugs 8y ago

Like it or not, Instagram is the strongest platform for photo sharing at this point since 500px never really took off and Flickr is a raging dumpster fire that refuses to go out. I have 2 Instagram accounts that are basically the last vestiges of my social media presence: one for street photography which is a longstanding hobby of mine, and one for more social-media-y stuff and portraits of friends. Instagram, for better or worse (most definitely worse), is the best way to share these photos with a wider audience whether they're selfies or meticulously-edited photos which would otherwise just sit on a harddrive.