3 ms·
More generally if you want to redact pixels, then don't replace them with information that depend on those pixel values. It doesn't necessarily mean a black rec
by steerablesafe 5y ago
More generally if you want to redact pixels, then don't replace them with information that depend on those pixel values. It doesn't necessarily mean a black rectangle, but that's certainly simple and it works.
- mannykannot 5y agoI’m slightly curious as to how, in these cases, someone came to decide that blurring was the right way to do it. It seems unlikely that they never thought of simply blacking/ blanking the text, but if so, then blurring must have seemed preferable. My best guess is that, having seen blurring of faces (which is arguably OK when one merely wants to avoid casual attempts at identification, while retaining a ‘natural’ look), they assumed this was the proper way to do it in all cases.
- jerf 5y agoI think it leaves the visual interest behind. Black bars are both boring and jarring. It's aesthetically displeasing on many levels. Unfortunately, part of "leaving the visual interest behind" is precisely "pixels that depend on their real underlying values"....
- josefx 5y agoYou could use filler text like lorem ipsum to keep a natural appearance without exposing any information. Of course that is a bit more work than just dropping a blur effect on an existing document and exporting it as PDF.
- kqr 5y agoRetaining a "natural" look is phrased well. I think that's all behind the decision to infrasample (opposite of supersample?) parts of an image.
- anon_123g987 5y agoThe opposite of supersample would be subsample.
- MauranKilom 5y agoOr just "undersample".