3 ms·

Really? Presumably she was paid. I don't know what the copyright situation is, but assuming she doesn't hold that I don't know what the issue is. Isn't it lik

• Version467 4y ago
  That she likely has no legal recourse does not mean that developers and researchers cannot respect her wishes. It's not like this specific image has an inherent property that somehow makes it the superior test image.
  • jerf 4y ago
    To me, that's the real kicker; there's absolutely no cost whatsoever to respecting the wishes. If anything, it's not a great image; the standard scan is a bit washed out and doesn't have a full color range. (I can't speak to whether this is a characteristic of the scan, which is now from a very old scanner, or the original image, having never seen the original in print.) No one test image can capture everything an image algorithm might want to test, but more full use of available colors would probably still be advantageous.
  • benj111 4y ago
    >It's not like this specific image has an inherent property that somehow makes it the superior test image. Surely that fact that it is the standard test image makes it a superior image. If there's a format that I can't reproduce, there's a good chance there's an image of Lena to compare against.
• vidarh 4y ago
  Do you not see the difference between the issue of whether it can legally be used, and the issue of whether or not it's nice to keep using it when the person involved would prefer it not be? She, like Trump, is entitled to her opinion. And sometimes people want to respect people's opinions, sometimes not.