4 ms·

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 the

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."
- Spooky23 8y ago
  I don't know the answer to this. But I always use McDonald's (although any restaurant can be used here) as the core of the conundrum of fake vs. real. Look at a corporate shot of a cheeseburger and compare it to reality. The marketing cheeseburger is the platonic ideal of the product -- it's fresh, perfectly prepared with care with all of the ingredients visible. The cheeseburger on the ground looks like a crumpled napkin in comparison. Is the marketing cheeseburger fake? When I look at some of the more image-conscious Facebook/Instagram people, some of them are kinda insane with editing and retouching. My wife has an old acquaintance who produces a highly "optimized" picture at least twice a month. (With substantial retouch to her face and usually other body "enhancements". In the age of Instagram+Photoshop, when does someone cross the line from marketing cheeseburger to fraud?
  - DisruptiveDave 8y ago
    Go further down the rabbit hole on that one; is makeup a form of fraud? Heels / lifts? Push up bras? Instagram has simply accelerated and magnified what already happens in good ol' regular life (and introduced mass distribution of it).
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    “Is the marketing cheeseburger fake?” I would say yes, it’s fake and probably fraud. You should have to show real products in advertising and not an idealized version.
    - joncrocks 8y ago
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSd0keSj2W8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSd0keSj2W8
dingaling 8y ago
Both Canon and Nikon offered expensive cryptographic addons for their pro cameras that signed out-of-camera images. It never really caught on due to cost and, more significantly, the acceptance that some postprod as always required ( except for straight-to-press sports shots ).
gcb0 8y ago
for younger people, this is already solved by noticing each online system corruption of the image. e.g. some social networks add a greenish tint, other have a bug that adds an also greenish (but stronger) tiny to only the last column of pixels, etc. then by looking at those artifacts you can know not only if it's a repost but for how long it's been reposted. it's a skill we, older, not so immersed, totally miss.
theExperience 8y ago
To me this is like saying, "I'd like TV shows to all be shot live with no editing, and I'd like my books and news articles to be first drafts." I mean there's a place for those things (live theater or SNL, and poetry slams where stuff is improvised), but I certainly wouldn't want the majority of my media to be like that. Editing is more than just removing the ugly and emphasizing the beautiful. It's a way to clarify what point you're making.

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."
Spooky23 8y ago
I don't know the answer to this. But I always use McDonald's (although any restaurant can be used here) as the core of the conundrum of fake vs. real. Look at a corporate shot of a cheeseburger and compare it to reality. The marketing cheeseburger is the platonic ideal of the product -- it's fresh, perfectly prepared with care with all of the ingredients visible. The cheeseburger on the ground looks like a crumpled napkin in comparison. Is the marketing cheeseburger fake? When I look at some of the more image-conscious Facebook/Instagram people, some of them are kinda insane with editing and retouching. My wife has an old acquaintance who produces a highly "optimized" picture at least twice a month. (With substantial retouch to her face and usually other body "enhancements". In the age of Instagram+Photoshop, when does someone cross the line from marketing cheeseburger to fraud?
- DisruptiveDave 8y ago
  Go further down the rabbit hole on that one; is makeup a form of fraud? Heels / lifts? Push up bras? Instagram has simply accelerated and magnified what already happens in good ol' regular life (and introduced mass distribution of it).
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  “Is the marketing cheeseburger fake?” I would say yes, it’s fake and probably fraud. You should have to show real products in advertising and not an idealized version.
  - joncrocks 8y ago
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSd0keSj2W8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSd0keSj2W8

dingaling 8y ago

Both Canon and Nikon offered expensive cryptographic addons for their pro cameras that signed out-of-camera images. It never really caught on due to cost and, more significantly, the acceptance that some postprod as always required ( except for straight-to-press sports shots ).

gcb0 8y ago

for younger people, this is already solved by noticing each online system corruption of the image. e.g. some social networks add a greenish tint, other have a bug that adds an also greenish (but stronger) tiny to only the last column of pixels, etc. then by looking at those artifacts you can know not only if it's a repost but for how long it's been reposted. it's a skill we, older, not so immersed, totally miss.

theExperience 8y ago

To me this is like saying, "I'd like TV shows to all be shot live with no editing, and I'd like my books and news articles to be first drafts." I mean there's a place for those things (live theater or SNL, and poetry slams where stuff is improvised), but I certainly wouldn't want the majority of my media to be like that. Editing is more than just removing the ugly and emphasizing the beautiful. It's a way to clarify what point you're making.