Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: eronald on October 09, 2008, 12:45:26 pm
-
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2008/10/0...OFCm6kCJzqrLzOA (http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2008/10/08/fashion/20081009-SKIN_index.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1223570602-roNLnwnOFCm6kCJzqrLzOA)
-
I think this will still be a while before any retouchers that are worth something will be replaced by that. Those are 5 minute Photoshop jobs. Just add a bit of liquify, juggle some pixels and bobs your aunty,...or uncle. With pukka lips
-
Brigitte Bardot looks like Elle Mcpherson after the "enhancement". That is like making a Mclaren F1 look like a Miata.
This program in general gets rid of the features that make us, human beings, unique. Sad.
Eduardo
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2008/10/0...OFCm6kCJzqrLzOA (http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2008/10/08/fashion/20081009-SKIN_index.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1223570602-roNLnwnOFCm6kCJzqrLzOA)
-
Please excuse me for not shaking in my boots.
-
LOL, what a joke. It's not even doing any retouching, just some liquify. On most the photos I could hardly see a difference and on several they actually looked worse in the "after" photo.
-
this is funny. marketing - gotta love it.
-
this is funny. marketing - gotta love it.
Yeah, but maybe it does dezit young Joe Average ...
Anybody can do that once, only a hero can do it for all the portraits in a school shoot.
Edmund
-
In addition to the above,
The software program is based on the responses of 68 men and women, age 25 to 40, from Israel and Germany
In order to get statistically even opinion, the number of people should be 200-300 people. Having 68 respondents and making retouching on their opinions' base is like making random retouching ))
-
Hmmm it is just interesting I thing. I am not sure you can simply program a computer to judge what needs to be retouched, because it is very subjective. I actually think
it made some portraits worst than the original. It would take a true AI technology to replace not the way we retouch, but the personal way of thinking-approaching beauty.
-
Scientists took the data and applied an algorithm involving 234 measurements between facial features, including the distances between lips and chin, the forehead and the eyes, or between the eyes.... The research, published in the August proceedings of Siggraph, an annual conference on computer graphics, is one of the latest studies in a growing field that merges beauty and science, a subject that has drawn mounting interest in academia in the last decade.
I think perhaps you are taking it a little too seriously. It's not a product, it's not marketing, and it certainly has no impact on the average photographer. It was a science project to analyze the human face and what we find attractive. It has nothing to do with photography or the best ways to manipulate an image.
-
Most of the "afters" are pretty atrocious. I don't think too many retouchers are concerned.
I'll bet OnONE buys the technology pretty soon though - they've done that with every emergent photo-editing algorithm in recent years.
-
can you imagine if some of the casting agents use it.. or models use to make up head sheets.. and you don't do a go see!
yikes!! But I guess the outside world doesn't realize how much tweeking goes on post and the article in the times played into
that ignorance.
-
it must have been a slow fashion/beauty news week....this is far from revolutionary or imo that newsworthy as there has already been a program developed by a british group (anthropic technologies) and commercially available for nearly 2 years called portrait professional, that does much of the same thing....it hasn't made pro retouchers quake in their boots yet either....
fwiw here is the link:http://www.portraitprofessional.com/photo_editing_software/