4 ms·
Yes, it actually did. And as it says in the link: >".... if they can detect and preserve fabric, rope, cloud, and other textures, why not skin texture as well?
by Dah00n 3y ago
Yes, it actually did. And as it says in the link:
>".... if they can detect and preserve fabric, rope, cloud, and other textures, why not skin texture as well?"
The phone changed the image on skin and not on random other things that wasn't a face. That is a filter, not normal image processing, when it happens only on X but not on Y. The only way to not get this filter on the phone is using RAW.
- astrange 3y ago> And as it says in the link That is the opinion of an uninformed tech writer, and even besides that, he's not claiming it did happen but just that it could possibly happen. In this case you do have someone who knows how it works, that someone being me. > The phone changed the image on skin and not on random other things that wasn't a face. There are some reasons you'd want to process faces differently, namely that viewers look at them the most, and that if you get the color wrong people either look sickly or get annoyed that you've whitewashed them. Also, when tone mapping you likely want to treat the foreground and background differently, and people are usually foreground elements.
- Dah00n 3y ago>There are some reasons you'd want to process faces differently Yes and then you have applied a filter.
- astrange 3y agoIt's done to make it more realistic, not less.
- Dah00n 3y agoYou are arguing semantics. A filter is a filter is a filter. Apple applied filters to phone images. Your definition of "more realistic" might be on your Filter Positive List, but it is no less a filter than one that make skin whiter or breasts smaller.