5 ms·

Is it acceptable that ieee.org posts an article with a faked photo?

lucideer 7y ago
Calling it "faked" is somewhat hyperbolic. The article refers to it as an "image" (as opposed to a raw source photo) that it clearly states is the result of "image processing". It's common practice in science to produce such representative images, e.g. in a lot of astronomy, space photgraphy, and things like SEMs
- rebuilder 7y ago
  The caption for the image on the IEEE article : "Photo: Chongqing University Two cotton leaves grown in the Chang’e-4 lander on the far side of the moon."
  - lucideer 7y ago
    I don't maintain the IEEE site, so I guess I can't be sure, but that seems more of a CMS default label for image credits than a deliberate statement on the nature of the content.
- reaperducer 7y ago
  it clearly states is the result of "image processing". I see no such statement, clearly or otherwise. It's common practice in science to produce such representative images Maybe this is one reason why a growing number of people don't believe scientists anymore. "Representative images" sounds like the fine print in a used car ad.
  - seanccox 7y ago
    "The team behind a pioneering biological experiment sent to the lunar far side has released an image showing two green leaves grown on the moon." "Image processing has now shown that two cotton leaves had grown—rather than just one as initially thought—in what was the first biological growth experiment on the moon."
    - reaperducer 7y ago
      "Photo: Chongqing University Two cotton leaves grown in the Chang’e-4 lander on the far side of the moon." Photo = "Photograph" Photo ≠ "We made this cool rendering of what we imagine something like this would look like."
      - avar 7y ago
        "Photo" is used synonymously with "image" or "rendering" depending on the context, e.g. try searching for "Hubble photography" and you'll find plenty of examples of cool renderings from aggregated photographic source data.
        magicalhippo 7y ago
        Sure, Hubble images are seldom seen raw, but the resulting images are based on actual photos. This however seems to have been an outright illustration, and should have be labelled as such.
      - errantspark 7y ago
        Replying to the other comment on this, it's too deep for a normal reply but a hubble composite and a 3d render have very little to do with one-another outside the fact that they're both images.
superkuh 7y ago
ieee.org (and IEEE Xplore, etc) has gone downhill very fast recently accompaning their design downgrade to an all JS based website. I guess content follows form.
FrojoS 7y ago
Spectrum has been a verily low quality publication for a long as I know it (about 10y).

Calling it "faked" is somewhat hyperbolic. The article refers to it as an "image" (as opposed to a raw source photo) that it clearly states is the result of "image processing". It's common practice in science to produce such representative images, e.g. in a lot of astronomy, space photgraphy, and things like SEMs

rebuilder 7y ago
The caption for the image on the IEEE article : "Photo: Chongqing University Two cotton leaves grown in the Chang’e-4 lander on the far side of the moon."
- lucideer 7y ago
  I don't maintain the IEEE site, so I guess I can't be sure, but that seems more of a CMS default label for image credits than a deliberate statement on the nature of the content.
reaperducer 7y ago
it clearly states is the result of "image processing". I see no such statement, clearly or otherwise. It's common practice in science to produce such representative images Maybe this is one reason why a growing number of people don't believe scientists anymore. "Representative images" sounds like the fine print in a used car ad.
- seanccox 7y ago
  "The team behind a pioneering biological experiment sent to the lunar far side has released an image showing two green leaves grown on the moon." "Image processing has now shown that two cotton leaves had grown—rather than just one as initially thought—in what was the first biological growth experiment on the moon."
  - reaperducer 7y ago
    "Photo: Chongqing University Two cotton leaves grown in the Chang’e-4 lander on the far side of the moon." Photo = "Photograph" Photo ≠ "We made this cool rendering of what we imagine something like this would look like."
    - avar 7y ago
      "Photo" is used synonymously with "image" or "rendering" depending on the context, e.g. try searching for "Hubble photography" and you'll find plenty of examples of cool renderings from aggregated photographic source data.
      - magicalhippo 7y ago
        Sure, Hubble images are seldom seen raw, but the resulting images are based on actual photos. This however seems to have been an outright illustration, and should have be labelled as such.
    - errantspark 7y ago
      Replying to the other comment on this, it's too deep for a normal reply but a hubble composite and a 3d render have very little to do with one-another outside the fact that they're both images.

superkuh 7y ago

ieee.org (and IEEE Xplore, etc) has gone downhill very fast recently accompaning their design downgrade to an all JS based website. I guess content follows form.

FrojoS 7y ago

Spectrum has been a verily low quality publication for a long as I know it (about 10y).