6 ms·

I recently visited an art gallery, where during a tour of the facility the owner shared that he has art appraisal clients worldwide, with whom he works remotely

I recently visited an art gallery, where during a tour of the facility the owner shared that he has art appraisal clients worldwide, with whom he works remotely. I asked, "So do you send a photographer to capture high quality images of the artwork?" He simply took out his phone and shared that smartphone images have gotten so good that it's the only equipment they need for the appraisal. Secretly, I was aghast that the professional appraisal of works worth tens of thousands of dollars might rely on a device that opaquely alters raw images. I didn't say anything, but I left hoping that not all art appraisal rested on post-processed smartphone images.

photoGrant 4y ago
Every camera and software pipeline for a photograph alters the raw images. You're just more aware of it. The iPhone can shoot raw and avoid these issues, it's how I use mine. The complaints people would have if the iPhone didn't post-process for the average consumer... Every camera phone I've ever used has horrible defaults for JPG processing -- avoid it by shooting raw and using something like Darkroom to finesse.
- tomxor 4y ago
  > Every camera and software pipeline for a photograph alters the raw images. You're just more aware of it. No, you use a half decent professional camera and you can even opt for RAW format, the only processing your getting is the averaging algorithm for your exposure and ISO settings. Even without that all you are getting is some JPG compression, not half baked ML trying to move people's faces around, that's bonkers. Also pretty sure you are not getting RAW on any phone unless you are running some very custom OS/software, even then seems pretty pointless considering how noisy it's going to be.
  - photoGrant 4y ago
    Sorry, your no is a little confident -- and you're entirely wrong. A camera generating a RAW file for you is doing much more than just sending you the data from the binned pixels. Where you want to step in on that line determines how much control you have. It's the reason some still pick RED vs Alexa. Your RAW File & Colour Science aren't just up to you, they're carefully mastered with an ODT -- On Device Transform. Also, let's see how Nikon go in the near future with Snapdragon. These images are 90% shot on iPhone -- raw and edited in Darkroom on iOS. https://instagram.com/grant.pal https://instagram.com/grant.pal
    - shiftpgdn 4y ago
      My Sigma FP isn’t using a deep learning model to enhance the image like an iPhone is (in iPhones case, deep field has added faces to photos, and all sort of other crazy stuff.) It’s dishonest to try compare color profiles with AI image manipulation .
      - photoGrant 4y ago
        My Canon is for autofocus.
    - epgui 4y ago
      Oh hi Grant! I didn't know you read HN! Hahaha.
    - tomxor 4y ago
      What is your point? are you merely trying to argue your original comment was somehow correct based on a technicality? Sure I forgot about colour correction, congrats... It's pretty absurd to argue uniform pixel data manipulation for colour processing is somehow comparable to ML based full image manipulation. One is for the purpose of trying to improve accuracy, the other is doing the exact opposite.
      - photoGrant 4y ago
        It’s a technical discussion, sorry.
        tomxor 4y ago
        I appreciate technically accurate, we all do that's why were here - I might suggest a little more context awareness though, lest you miss the point. Tangents are also fun, just not like this: > and you're entirely wrong But i'm not perfect either: I was being pushy in the tone of my previous comments.. I was focused on the high level differences but too impatient in my delivery - Had I been more nuanced and respectful you might have been more receptive to it, sorry.
CharlesW 4y ago
> Secretly, I was aghast that the professional appraisal of works worth tens of thousands of dollars might rely on a device that opaquely alters raw images. I'm not sure if you mean "raw" in RAW sense, but FWIW this critique applies to Smart HDR specifically. If you shoot and share RAW images with an iPhone Smart HDR is not used, and you will reliably see something closely resembling reality.¹ I shoot everything in RAW, trained by the regret of not doing this for special shots earlier in my life. ¹ "You can, of course, take a RAW photo using apps like Halide (it’s worth noting that ProRAW photos are still post-processed), but then you’ll have a much larger image file just to get a more natural result."
- cardamomo 4y ago
  You're right, I don't mean RAW. Thank you for clarifying!
scottiebarnes 4y ago
Any camera or photo only gives you a version of reality. Exposure, white balance, 35mm vs 50mm vs 120mm, etc., can all affect the image subtly. So even with "pro tools", your RAW images are getting doctored by photographer choices.
- kevincox 4y ago
  To some degree there is no such thing as the true image. However many devices, especially some smartphones are really going past "representing reality" and into enhancing what the viewer wants.
  - cardamomo 4y ago
    This is really my point. I'm not arguing that the appraiser should only look at the artwork with their own eyes. Rather, the degree to which phones are enhancing photos is not transparent to the average end user and therefore is risky to use in an application that relies on the details of an image being scrutinized.
    - arcticbull 4y ago
      iOS allows you to shoot in RAW and avoid all (some?) post-processing. [1] I believe its even easier to set up in Halide. Is it possible the appraiser was doing so? [1] https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/iphone/iphae1e882a3/ios https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/iphone/iphae1e882a3/io...
      - bee_rider 4y ago
        Note that this is only available on certain models. Not to contradict you or anything, the appraiser might have had one such model!
        astrange 4y ago
        Just use a third party camera app and it’s available on any iPhone. I promise all dedicated cameras are also doing (almost all of) this kind of processing though. It’s needed to develop raw images at all. The specific tuning is just up to taste.
BeFlatXIII 4y ago
Isn’t art appraisal pretty much all made-up numbers, anyway?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

photoGrant 4y ago

Every camera and software pipeline for a photograph alters the raw images. You're just more aware of it. The iPhone can shoot raw and avoid these issues, it's how I use mine. The complaints people would have if the iPhone didn't post-process for the average consumer... Every camera phone I've ever used has horrible defaults for JPG processing -- avoid it by shooting raw and using something like Darkroom to finesse.

tomxor 4y ago
> Every camera and software pipeline for a photograph alters the raw images. You're just more aware of it. No, you use a half decent professional camera and you can even opt for RAW format, the only processing your getting is the averaging algorithm for your exposure and ISO settings. Even without that all you are getting is some JPG compression, not half baked ML trying to move people's faces around, that's bonkers. Also pretty sure you are not getting RAW on any phone unless you are running some very custom OS/software, even then seems pretty pointless considering how noisy it's going to be.
- photoGrant 4y ago
  Sorry, your no is a little confident -- and you're entirely wrong. A camera generating a RAW file for you is doing much more than just sending you the data from the binned pixels. Where you want to step in on that line determines how much control you have. It's the reason some still pick RED vs Alexa. Your RAW File & Colour Science aren't just up to you, they're carefully mastered with an ODT -- On Device Transform. Also, let's see how Nikon go in the near future with Snapdragon. These images are 90% shot on iPhone -- raw and edited in Darkroom on iOS. https://instagram.com/grant.pal https://instagram.com/grant.pal
  - shiftpgdn 4y ago
    My Sigma FP isn’t using a deep learning model to enhance the image like an iPhone is (in iPhones case, deep field has added faces to photos, and all sort of other crazy stuff.) It’s dishonest to try compare color profiles with AI image manipulation .
    - photoGrant 4y ago
      My Canon is for autofocus.
  - epgui 4y ago
    Oh hi Grant! I didn't know you read HN! Hahaha.
  - tomxor 4y ago
    What is your point? are you merely trying to argue your original comment was somehow correct based on a technicality? Sure I forgot about colour correction, congrats... It's pretty absurd to argue uniform pixel data manipulation for colour processing is somehow comparable to ML based full image manipulation. One is for the purpose of trying to improve accuracy, the other is doing the exact opposite.
    - photoGrant 4y ago
      It’s a technical discussion, sorry.
      - tomxor 4y ago
        I appreciate technically accurate, we all do that's why were here - I might suggest a little more context awareness though, lest you miss the point. Tangents are also fun, just not like this: > and you're entirely wrong But i'm not perfect either: I was being pushy in the tone of my previous comments.. I was focused on the high level differences but too impatient in my delivery - Had I been more nuanced and respectful you might have been more receptive to it, sorry.

CharlesW 4y ago

> Secretly, I was aghast that the professional appraisal of works worth tens of thousands of dollars might rely on a device that opaquely alters raw images. I'm not sure if you mean "raw" in RAW sense, but FWIW this critique applies to Smart HDR specifically. If you shoot and share RAW images with an iPhone Smart HDR is not used, and you will reliably see something closely resembling reality.¹ I shoot everything in RAW, trained by the regret of not doing this for special shots earlier in my life. ¹ "You can, of course, take a RAW photo using apps like Halide (it’s worth noting that ProRAW photos are still post-processed), but then you’ll have a much larger image file just to get a more natural result."

cardamomo 4y ago
You're right, I don't mean RAW. Thank you for clarifying!

scottiebarnes 4y ago

Any camera or photo only gives you a version of reality. Exposure, white balance, 35mm vs 50mm vs 120mm, etc., can all affect the image subtly. So even with "pro tools", your RAW images are getting doctored by photographer choices.

kevincox 4y ago
To some degree there is no such thing as the true image. However many devices, especially some smartphones are really going past "representing reality" and into enhancing what the viewer wants.
- cardamomo 4y ago
  This is really my point. I'm not arguing that the appraiser should only look at the artwork with their own eyes. Rather, the degree to which phones are enhancing photos is not transparent to the average end user and therefore is risky to use in an application that relies on the details of an image being scrutinized.
  - arcticbull 4y ago
    iOS allows you to shoot in RAW and avoid all (some?) post-processing. [1] I believe its even easier to set up in Halide. Is it possible the appraiser was doing so? [1] https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/iphone/iphae1e882a3/ios https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/iphone/iphae1e882a3/io...
    - bee_rider 4y ago
      Note that this is only available on certain models. Not to contradict you or anything, the appraiser might have had one such model!
      - astrange 4y ago
        Just use a third party camera app and it’s available on any iPhone. I promise all dedicated cameras are also doing (almost all of) this kind of processing though. It’s needed to develop raw images at all. The specific tuning is just up to taste.

BeFlatXIII 4y ago

Isn’t art appraisal pretty much all made-up numbers, anyway?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]