3 ms·
Anyone know how resistant this could be to cropping, scaling, or grading? Is this purely for verifying the raw or could this be something that social platforms
by h0l0cube 3y ago
Anyone know how resistant this could be to cropping, scaling, or grading? Is this purely for verifying the raw or could this be something that social platforms could verify and tag on posts?
- Retr0id 3y agoThe idea is that full edit history is preserved - not verbatim in the metadata, but as a tag that can be looked up in a database. More info here: https://c2pa.org/ https://c2pa.org/
- h0l0cube 3y agoAs much as I can glean from the video, it's heavily dependent on a central database to hold the edits. If someone alters a video, the original would need to be viewable. Who's storing that, and streaming it? And then who's paying for that? I'm guessing that in the end this will be a paid service for journalistic organizations who buy in.
- jdietrich 3y ago>If someone alters a video, the original would need to be viewable. What exactly do you mean by "need"? This system doesn't stop anyone from distributing edited or staged or otherwise bogus media, because that was never the intention. It does allow someone to demonstrate - with a fairly high level of trustworthiness - that the media they're delivering is raw, unedited footage taken with a particular camera at a particular time in a particular place.
- Retr0id 3y agoProving that you're delivering the raw unedited footage requires retaining the raw unedited footage (i.e. whatever was originally signed by the camera body), and distributing it to anyone who asks to check your proofs. This is inevitably a different (and much larger) file, to whatever ends up streaming from social media platforms.
- h0l0cube 3y agoBy alter, I mean legitimately within the C2PA framework. It’s a matter of cost and control, and who’s arbitrating that