3 ms·
It's a pretty huge leap to assume that the image you see in a public news article online is the same image the police have access to without any form of recompr
by pc86 5y ago
It's a pretty huge leap to assume that the image you see in a public news article online is the same image the police have access to without any form of recompression or artifacting.
- Kenji 5y agoThe fingers are out of focus. No amount of image resolution will correct for out of focus optics at the time the photo was taken. The fingerprints are nowhere to be found in this picture. So clearly something is bogus about the claims in the article.
- dTal 5y ago"Bogus" seems strongly worded when the article makes no hard claims, but it does call into question the implication we're all here for, which is that fingerprints were extracted from the photo. Although, come to think of it, it is in fact perfectly possible in theory to recover information from out-of-focus images. In practice it tends not to work well due to noise, but it's theoretically a reversible transform if you can deduce the blurring kernel. I highly doubt it would work well on a social media JPEG, however.
- doetoe 5y agoA convolution is not generally reversible. Or are you thinking of something else?
- dTal 5y agoThe blur is clearly optical.