7 ms·

Cloud images that are recognized as human faces by a face-detection algorithm

276 points by jsvine 12y ago

jsvine 12y ago
> ‘Cloud Face’ is a collection of cloud images that are recognized as human face by a face-detection algorithm. It is a result of computer’s vision error, but they often look like faces to human eyes, too. This work attempts to examine the relation between computer vision and human vision.
- rdlecler1 12y ago
  Is it really computer error? Most of us probably saw the face of Einstein in the one cloud photo, because in fact there was a strong resemblance. If a artist paints a caricature or abstract image we can often identify the original subject. That's not error. There is something else going on here.
  - kruczek 12y ago
    It is an error in a sense that these are not in fact faces, but clouds. While humans also can see shapes of faces in clouds, we are capable of understanding that these are not real faces. Computer algorithm is not capable of recognizing the difference which results in such misclassification, thus it is failing its intended purpose.
clarkmoody 12y ago
I was pleasantly surprised when this wasn't a bot unleashed on the 'cloud' to recognize human faces. The resulting images do make an interesting exhibit of modern techno-art.
NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
This is the basis of "artificial creativity". Train these NNs to recognize faces (or anything else, maybe especially everything else), and then run random noise through them. See what they come up with. You could have an algorithm coming up with some pretty decent (and original) cartoon faces. Or with art, abstract or not. This is what your brain does.
- mkal_tsr 12y ago
  Now we just need a 90s Drug PSA spoof, "This is your brain. This is your brain on neural networks. A cloud is not a face. Neural nets, not even once."
- mattwad 12y ago
  That doesn't sound right. You suggest if you give the computer something that looks like a face, then add a filter, it has somehow created an idea on its own. Yet you are still telling the computer what to do, it has done nothing creative on its own. I'd venture that real "creativity" is the reverse ... the ability to create something that is recognizable as a face.
  - wtallis 12y ago
    Random input filtered by face detection does create new faces. It's just a different method of creating faces than one that derives a face from the parameters of the face filter (which is more like how a human would do it), but either way, you get new output that is identifiable and identified as a face. Yes, the computer is biased by your input of the face detection filter, but how is that any different than a human's cultural biases? The only real differences are purely internal details.
  - NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
    No. I suggest giving the thing noise. Give it lots of noise. Let it find its own face. Let it find several, and let it score the ones it thinks are the best. Then maybe toss those at another NN that's been trained on cartoon faces. Let it modify this noise-face so that it's more cartoonish. And just keep iterating through it like that. > it has somehow created an idea on its own. Can we please grow up. Creative people aren't "creating" like some judeo-christian deity ex nihilo. They're exploring a finite ideaspace and keeping the best ideas they stumble upon.
    - TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
      There's an entire branch of computer science devoted to studying creativity and computation. Google Prof Geraint Wiggins for some examples. His ideas about this are a bit more thoughtful and insightful than 'exploring a finite ideaspace.'
jrapdx3 12y ago
We do tend to "see" patterns that associate to built-in or learned abstractions, such as faces (or elephants, etc.) in clouds. This is especially the case when social reinforcement is a factor, like when someone points skyward and asks, "don't you see a face in that cloud?" and soon everyone standing nearby agrees it sure looks like a face. That computers are "fooled" may simply reflect their human programming, though not being fooled could well be a very hard problem to solve. It's amusing the way face-detection in my spiffy digital camera (an Olympus EM1) will find faces in all kinds of inanimate objects. The feature can be useful for photographing real people, but in other situations face-detection is just a distraction and I keep it turned off. Though now I may have to aim the camera at a few clouds...
- smorrow 12y ago
  > It's amusing the way FACE-DETECTION in my spiffy digital camera (an Olympus EM1) will find faces in all kinds of inanimate objects. They set out to specifically look for faces. So that's what they'll find.
  - jrapdx3 12y ago
    But when it finds a "face" and it's really a pile of old flower pots--not even close to a concept of "human face"--now that's amusing. It shows the limits of the technology, but as in the article, technological quirks can sometimes be exploited creatively.
mastermindxs 12y ago
I was really excited for this then I realized I have the cloud to butt extension on chrome.
arb99 12y ago
This one is interesting too... http://ssbkyh.com/works/cat_human/ http://ssbkyh.com/works/cat_human/ " Human faces recognized as a cat face by a cat face-detection algorithm" and "Cat faces recognized as a human face by a human face-detection algorithm"
- bitwize 12y ago
  A lot of Serious Cats got recognized as humans...
  - TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
    Aren't there entire websites devoted to this?
ewindisch 12y ago
Far more interesting is their facial-captcha project: http://ssbkyh.com/works/fadtcha/ http://ssbkyh.com/works/fadtcha/ They assume that a computer will detect faces where humans do not and use such a selection as a captcha. It forces the computer to make a random guess against its matches so there is still a chance of it getting the right answer, but it's an interesting concept.
- camillomiller 12y ago
  A lot of artistic value, but not so many practical applications. To bypass this, a bot can simply be tweaked to draw a frame shifted of x and y pixels in any direction after correctly guessing a face. The system will see no match with the non-detectable-by-a-human face and therefore it will think the bot is a human.
  - camillomiller 12y ago
    I got downvoted, but I don't get why. Is that an incorrect explanation or interpretation? I'd really love to know. thanks.
    - bostonpete 12y ago
      I didn't downvote you but I read your comment a half a dozen times and couldn't make sense of it...
      - camillomiller 12y ago
        I was explaining why, in my opinion, the facial captcha project isn't very functional, at least as it is described on the artist's website. It was an explanation of the simplest method a bot could use to game that system.
        bostonpete 12y ago
        I understood what you were trying to do. The method you described for gaming the system just didn't seem to make sense.
tly_alex 12y ago
I tested those "cloud face" in the popular face recognition engine rekognition.com. None of them actually got recognized as face. Looks like the face recognition algorithm they uses are pretty smart.
- tly_alex 12y ago
  Forgot to paste the testing page: http://rekognition.com/demo/face http://rekognition.com/demo/face
- georgemcbay 12y ago
  If you upload the image of the overall piece (the one with an out-of-focus head looking towards it) 2 of the cloud faces are recognized as faces. The other image of the piece taken at a more skewed angle with no head blocking it actually recognizes 3 of the panels as faces. See: http://imgur.com/afUsGGj http://imgur.com/afUsGGj The funny thing about seeing false faces (or patterns in general, really) is that scale (and to some degree composition) matters, even for us humans. When I look at the large picture of the cloud that is the first one presented in the article at 100% scaling, I struggle to see any sort of meaningful face. But when I locate that same image as a panel on the overall work in a smaller scaled down presentation I see the 'face' immediately. With a browser that can appropriately scale down to 25% or less I can see the same thing happening with the actual large source images... once I hit about 50% scaling I can see the "faces" that the computer recognized. Obviously YMMV depending upon monitor size vs dpi as to where they stop being clouds and start being faces.
  - tly_alex 12y ago
    yeah, those clouds looks totally like drawing of faces. Looks like the face of a statue in the museum.
- Houshalter 12y ago
  Different algorithms will usually get different false positives. This is why large collections of algorithms generally perform much better than the best individual algorithm. I imagine these are all weird edge cases as it is.
bitwize 12y ago
I was a bit flabbergasted the first time I pointed a digital camera at an Obey Giant sticker and a popup appeared: "The subject of this photo may have closed their eyes." Maybe I shouldn't have been?
thomasjonas 12y ago
Berlin based design studio OnFormative did a similar project using Google Maps as source material: http://www.onformative.com/lab/googlefaces/ http://www.onformative.com/lab/googlefaces/ Very nice to see more projects where algorithms and art come together. This post also reminded me a bit of this project where a face detection algorithm and a psuedo-genetic algorithm are combined to create faces out of noise: http://lbrandy.com/blog/2009/04/genetic-algorithms-evolving-human-faces/ http://lbrandy.com/blog/2009/04/genetic-algorithms-evolving-...
rkda 12y ago
So the algorithm has imagination. heh.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
bane 12y ago
I think this means the algorithm is working.

276 points by jsvine 12y ago

> ‘Cloud Face’ is a collection of cloud images that are recognized as human face by a face-detection algorithm. It is a result of computer’s vision error, but they often look like faces to human eyes, too. This work attempts to examine the relation between computer vision and human vision.

rdlecler1 12y ago
Is it really computer error? Most of us probably saw the face of Einstein in the one cloud photo, because in fact there was a strong resemblance. If a artist paints a caricature or abstract image we can often identify the original subject. That's not error. There is something else going on here.
- kruczek 12y ago
  It is an error in a sense that these are not in fact faces, but clouds. While humans also can see shapes of faces in clouds, we are capable of understanding that these are not real faces. Computer algorithm is not capable of recognizing the difference which results in such misclassification, thus it is failing its intended purpose.

clarkmoody 12y ago

I was pleasantly surprised when this wasn't a bot unleashed on the 'cloud' to recognize human faces. The resulting images do make an interesting exhibit of modern techno-art.

NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago

This is the basis of "artificial creativity". Train these NNs to recognize faces (or anything else, maybe especially everything else), and then run random noise through them. See what they come up with. You could have an algorithm coming up with some pretty decent (and original) cartoon faces. Or with art, abstract or not. This is what your brain does.

mkal_tsr 12y ago
Now we just need a 90s Drug PSA spoof, "This is your brain. This is your brain on neural networks. A cloud is not a face. Neural nets, not even once."
mattwad 12y ago
That doesn't sound right. You suggest if you give the computer something that looks like a face, then add a filter, it has somehow created an idea on its own. Yet you are still telling the computer what to do, it has done nothing creative on its own. I'd venture that real "creativity" is the reverse ... the ability to create something that is recognizable as a face.
- wtallis 12y ago
  Random input filtered by face detection does create new faces. It's just a different method of creating faces than one that derives a face from the parameters of the face filter (which is more like how a human would do it), but either way, you get new output that is identifiable and identified as a face. Yes, the computer is biased by your input of the face detection filter, but how is that any different than a human's cultural biases? The only real differences are purely internal details.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
  No. I suggest giving the thing noise. Give it lots of noise. Let it find its own face. Let it find several, and let it score the ones it thinks are the best. Then maybe toss those at another NN that's been trained on cartoon faces. Let it modify this noise-face so that it's more cartoonish. And just keep iterating through it like that. > it has somehow created an idea on its own. Can we please grow up. Creative people aren't "creating" like some judeo-christian deity ex nihilo. They're exploring a finite ideaspace and keeping the best ideas they stumble upon.
  - TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
    There's an entire branch of computer science devoted to studying creativity and computation. Google Prof Geraint Wiggins for some examples. His ideas about this are a bit more thoughtful and insightful than 'exploring a finite ideaspace.'

jrapdx3 12y ago

We do tend to "see" patterns that associate to built-in or learned abstractions, such as faces (or elephants, etc.) in clouds. This is especially the case when social reinforcement is a factor, like when someone points skyward and asks, "don't you see a face in that cloud?" and soon everyone standing nearby agrees it sure looks like a face. That computers are "fooled" may simply reflect their human programming, though not being fooled could well be a very hard problem to solve. It's amusing the way face-detection in my spiffy digital camera (an Olympus EM1) will find faces in all kinds of inanimate objects. The feature can be useful for photographing real people, but in other situations face-detection is just a distraction and I keep it turned off. Though now I may have to aim the camera at a few clouds...

smorrow 12y ago
> It's amusing the way FACE-DETECTION in my spiffy digital camera (an Olympus EM1) will find faces in all kinds of inanimate objects. They set out to specifically look for faces. So that's what they'll find.
- jrapdx3 12y ago
  But when it finds a "face" and it's really a pile of old flower pots--not even close to a concept of "human face"--now that's amusing. It shows the limits of the technology, but as in the article, technological quirks can sometimes be exploited creatively.

mastermindxs 12y ago

I was really excited for this then I realized I have the cloud to butt extension on chrome.

arb99 12y ago

This one is interesting too... http://ssbkyh.com/works/cat_human/ http://ssbkyh.com/works/cat_human/ " Human faces recognized as a cat face by a cat face-detection algorithm" and "Cat faces recognized as a human face by a human face-detection algorithm"

bitwize 12y ago
A lot of Serious Cats got recognized as humans...
- TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
  Aren't there entire websites devoted to this?

ewindisch 12y ago

Far more interesting is their facial-captcha project: http://ssbkyh.com/works/fadtcha/ http://ssbkyh.com/works/fadtcha/ They assume that a computer will detect faces where humans do not and use such a selection as a captcha. It forces the computer to make a random guess against its matches so there is still a chance of it getting the right answer, but it's an interesting concept.

camillomiller 12y ago
A lot of artistic value, but not so many practical applications. To bypass this, a bot can simply be tweaked to draw a frame shifted of x and y pixels in any direction after correctly guessing a face. The system will see no match with the non-detectable-by-a-human face and therefore it will think the bot is a human.
- camillomiller 12y ago
  I got downvoted, but I don't get why. Is that an incorrect explanation or interpretation? I'd really love to know. thanks.
  - bostonpete 12y ago
    I didn't downvote you but I read your comment a half a dozen times and couldn't make sense of it...
    - camillomiller 12y ago
      I was explaining why, in my opinion, the facial captcha project isn't very functional, at least as it is described on the artist's website. It was an explanation of the simplest method a bot could use to game that system.
      - bostonpete 12y ago
        I understood what you were trying to do. The method you described for gaming the system just didn't seem to make sense.

tly_alex 12y ago

I tested those "cloud face" in the popular face recognition engine rekognition.com. None of them actually got recognized as face. Looks like the face recognition algorithm they uses are pretty smart.

tly_alex 12y ago
Forgot to paste the testing page: http://rekognition.com/demo/face http://rekognition.com/demo/face
georgemcbay 12y ago
If you upload the image of the overall piece (the one with an out-of-focus head looking towards it) 2 of the cloud faces are recognized as faces. The other image of the piece taken at a more skewed angle with no head blocking it actually recognizes 3 of the panels as faces. See: http://imgur.com/afUsGGj http://imgur.com/afUsGGj The funny thing about seeing false faces (or patterns in general, really) is that scale (and to some degree composition) matters, even for us humans. When I look at the large picture of the cloud that is the first one presented in the article at 100% scaling, I struggle to see any sort of meaningful face. But when I locate that same image as a panel on the overall work in a smaller scaled down presentation I see the 'face' immediately. With a browser that can appropriately scale down to 25% or less I can see the same thing happening with the actual large source images... once I hit about 50% scaling I can see the "faces" that the computer recognized. Obviously YMMV depending upon monitor size vs dpi as to where they stop being clouds and start being faces.
- tly_alex 12y ago
  yeah, those clouds looks totally like drawing of faces. Looks like the face of a statue in the museum.
Houshalter 12y ago
Different algorithms will usually get different false positives. This is why large collections of algorithms generally perform much better than the best individual algorithm. I imagine these are all weird edge cases as it is.

bitwize 12y ago

I was a bit flabbergasted the first time I pointed a digital camera at an Obey Giant sticker and a popup appeared: "The subject of this photo may have closed their eyes." Maybe I shouldn't have been?

thomasjonas 12y ago

Berlin based design studio OnFormative did a similar project using Google Maps as source material: http://www.onformative.com/lab/googlefaces/ http://www.onformative.com/lab/googlefaces/ Very nice to see more projects where algorithms and art come together. This post also reminded me a bit of this project where a face detection algorithm and a psuedo-genetic algorithm are combined to create faces out of noise: http://lbrandy.com/blog/2009/04/genetic-algorithms-evolving-human-faces/ http://lbrandy.com/blog/2009/04/genetic-algorithms-evolving-...

rkda 12y ago

So the algorithm has imagination. heh.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

bane 12y ago

I think this means the algorithm is working.