12 ms·

You guys are conflating 'adjusting light levels and sharness' with 'replacing whole objects in one area of scene with other objects from the scene' I think thi

You guys are conflating 'adjusting light levels and sharness' with 'replacing whole objects in one area of scene with other objects from the scene' I think this particular big demonstrates a massive gap in what people think photoprocessing is, and what it has very recently become

judge2020 5y ago
Simply adjusting light levels and sharpness wouldn't produce this good/clear of a photo in the conditions presented - AI/ML image post-processing is a hard requirement for sensors like these.
- creato 5y ago
  The "hard requirement" is just multi-frame noise reduction, which has been around for a lot longer than the AI/ML hype wave, and has always had a risk of producing similar artifacts to this one.
  - jjeaff 5y ago
    Ya, I don't think anyone has been using ml/ai in camera phones up until the last 5 years maybe. But it does seem like they have quite a few high tech algorithms at play. More than just multi-frame noise reduction.
  - Retric 5y ago
    Multi-frame noise reduction only gets you so far. Rotating objects for example present huge issues and result in their own artifacts. In the end there isn’t a free lunch, any system that improves resulting images is making trade offs.
- spoonjim 5y ago
  But it’s also just weird. That’s not my daughter’s skin in the photo, it’s 1000 other people’s skin blended together and textured in.
  - laurent92 5y ago
    It’s what you desire your skin to be.
    - spoonjim 5y ago
      That might be good for myself, or if I’m honest even my wife, but my daughter looks perfect to me and I only want to see her in reality.
      - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
        No imaging system reproduces reality. You're always getting a compromised result.
        wholinator2 5y ago
        Yeah, even your eyes don't reproduce reality perfectly but at that point it's just semantics. He means he wants to see his daughter the same way through the camera that he sees her through his eyes, in real life, otherwise known to him as "reality". I don't think it's unreasonable to allow context of the statement to allow us to disregard "reality" as it pertains to quantum wave functions, in favor of something more human. There's a large difference in something that's goal is to capture what the eye sees and something that's goal isn't. It feels like Apple thinks they know what's better for us than we do, which I admit it's perfectly capable of doing in certain scenarios. But, when Apples thoughts do not align or go directly against our wishes it's uncomfortable, it feels like your "reality" is being ripped from your hands in favor of what some giant corporation thinks your reality should be, for any large number of opaque or intentionally obscured reasons.
        shawnz 5y ago
        As far as I understand the goal of using ML augmentation in camera phones is to capture what the eye sees. It's to compensate for the limitations of the hardware which on its own is not able to produce a true-to-eye result. You seem to be implying that the goal is to improve the photo to be better than reality but I don't think that's the case.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
aaron695 5y ago
dheera 5y ago
It probably all goes into a black box ML model nowadays, so the model will conflate it if we don't.
1-more 5y ago
the photographer replied later that it's due to a leaf hanging down from a branch in the foreground. There was a leaf in between the woman's head and the camera lens. Nothing weird happened.

judge2020 5y ago

Simply adjusting light levels and sharpness wouldn't produce this good/clear of a photo in the conditions presented - AI/ML image post-processing is a hard requirement for sensors like these.

creato 5y ago
The "hard requirement" is just multi-frame noise reduction, which has been around for a lot longer than the AI/ML hype wave, and has always had a risk of producing similar artifacts to this one.
- jjeaff 5y ago
  Ya, I don't think anyone has been using ml/ai in camera phones up until the last 5 years maybe. But it does seem like they have quite a few high tech algorithms at play. More than just multi-frame noise reduction.
- Retric 5y ago
  Multi-frame noise reduction only gets you so far. Rotating objects for example present huge issues and result in their own artifacts. In the end there isn’t a free lunch, any system that improves resulting images is making trade offs.
spoonjim 5y ago
But it’s also just weird. That’s not my daughter’s skin in the photo, it’s 1000 other people’s skin blended together and textured in.
- laurent92 5y ago
  It’s what you desire your skin to be.
  - spoonjim 5y ago
    That might be good for myself, or if I’m honest even my wife, but my daughter looks perfect to me and I only want to see her in reality.
    - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
      No imaging system reproduces reality. You're always getting a compromised result.
      - wholinator2 5y ago
        Yeah, even your eyes don't reproduce reality perfectly but at that point it's just semantics. He means he wants to see his daughter the same way through the camera that he sees her through his eyes, in real life, otherwise known to him as "reality". I don't think it's unreasonable to allow context of the statement to allow us to disregard "reality" as it pertains to quantum wave functions, in favor of something more human. There's a large difference in something that's goal is to capture what the eye sees and something that's goal isn't. It feels like Apple thinks they know what's better for us than we do, which I admit it's perfectly capable of doing in certain scenarios. But, when Apples thoughts do not align or go directly against our wishes it's uncomfortable, it feels like your "reality" is being ripped from your hands in favor of what some giant corporation thinks your reality should be, for any large number of opaque or intentionally obscured reasons.
        shawnz 5y ago
        As far as I understand the goal of using ML augmentation in camera phones is to capture what the eye sees. It's to compensate for the limitations of the hardware which on its own is not able to produce a true-to-eye result. You seem to be implying that the goal is to improve the photo to be better than reality but I don't think that's the case.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

aaron695 5y ago

dheera 5y ago

It probably all goes into a black box ML model nowadays, so the model will conflate it if we don't.

1-more 5y ago

the photographer replied later that it's due to a leaf hanging down from a branch in the foreground. There was a leaf in between the woman's head and the camera lens. Nothing weird happened.