4 ms·
I see no philosophical difference between adjusting in-camera settings (aperture, focus, white balance) and this. In both cases, you're modifying the "feel" of
by LocalH 7y ago
I see no philosophical difference between adjusting in-camera settings (aperture, focus, white balance) and this. In both cases, you're modifying the "feel" of the image (in fact, with preprocessing, you're generally affecting the image in a wholesale manner).
Digital cameras don't "capture reality", either. They scan the image over a small period of time, same as your average display in reverse. It's essentially a really fast time lapse, on the pixel level. Arguably, that's as much "not reality" as what Apple is doing here.
I mean, I guess I understand the idea of "capturing reality as close as possible". I just don't see much merit in caring too much outside of an academic context. This isn't deepfakery. This is shifting eyes to provide the much needed feedback of eye contact while on a video call.
- drdeca 7y agoThere is certainly something about reality that cameras reflect, namely, that looking at the images they produce results in an approximation of seeing what one would see if one’s eye was where the camera was. I suppose that goes without saying, seeing as that is sorta what cameras are (well.. many cameras. The central examples of cameras. IR cameras don’t quite have this property, but you know what I mean.), but sometimes it is “necessary to state tautologies” (though this isn’t a tautology exactly). A linear representation of a group needn’t distinguish between every pair of group elements for me to say that it “captures” some aspect of the group.