4 ms·
Can law enforcement convict someone due to a Computational Photograph? Google & Apple are digitally altering photos so much so to “enhance them”, couldn’t it
by tiffanyh 7y ago
Can law enforcement convict someone due to a Computational Photograph?
Google & Apple are digitally altering photos so much so to “enhance them”, couldn’t it be agrued the evidence of a crime photo has been tempered due to computational photography.
- thanatos_dem 7y agoI doubt it. “Tampering” usually requires an intent to obscure or subvert. Computation photography applied broadly to all photos doesn’t have that. Definition from OED: “interfere with (something) in order to cause damage or make unauthorized alterations.” The “in order to” seems to imply intent. Not sure if there’s a different legal definition however.
- bobbylarrybobby 7y agoBy the same logic should cropped photos or photos that have had the sliders mucked with count as altered?
- tiffanyh 7y agoI don’t see how cropping would introduce “reasonable doubt”. But a face being computationally altered by the photo seems like that would introduce reasonable doubt that the alleged person didn’t not in fact do the crime.
- adrr 7y agoWouldn’t every digital camera be guilty of that? White balance, lens correction profiles, noise reduction, compression.
- bufferoverflow 7y agoNot if you shoot raw. Plus none of these modifications really alter the content of the photo.
- tomatotomato37 7y agoThey'd have to throw out any digital picture taken in a JPG or GIF format, since those too require image "tampering" in order to get the size down
- pacetherace 7y agoApps that use deepfake like algorithms to enhance photos can fall into that category.
- tomc1985 7y agoI doubt it. I'd think a court/opposing counsel would examine the nature of that tampering to see if it could have effected the evidence or not