Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: LesPalenik on June 29, 2018, 03:29:22 pm
-
Simple and effective use of facial-recognition technology used by police to identify the Annapolis shooter. They matched a photograph of his face against a state database of driver’s-license and mugshot photos.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/06/capital-gazette-shooting-face-recognition/564185/
-
Simple and effective use of facial-recognition technology used by police to identify the Annapolis shooter. They matched a photograph of his face against a state database of driver’s-license and mugshot photos.
Isn't this also the reason that they want neutral expressions on passport photographs these days. Also, when my wife and I went to TSA earlier in the year to get global entry passes they took our pictures from the computer (we were also digitally fingerprinted). I'm sure all of this gets stored in a government database for AI matching should the need arise. Privacy is but a fleeting illusion.
-
For Jim Carrey, they will need quite a few photographs.
-
For Jim Carrey, they will need quite a few photographs.
Isn't that why image stitching was invented?
-
Isn't this also the reason that they want neutral expressions on passport photographs these days. Also, when my wife and I went to TSA earlier in the year to get global entry passes they took our pictures from the computer (we were also digitally fingerprinted). I'm sure all of this gets stored in a government database for AI matching should the need arise. Privacy is but a fleeting illusion.
Or at least anonymity is a fleeting illusion. I think you can still have privacy but you have to choose it by not having a Amazon Echo or cameras in your house. And curtains.
Did we ever have privacy when out in public doing something like traveling? I'd say no, but we may have had anonymity.
-
Just an FYI, facial recondition software does not work nearly as well as people think. You need a non-blurry in-focus image of a person's face from looking directly at them. If their head is even slightly angled in the image, the results will be skewed and inaccurate. Plus, you also need another image of similar composition in which the computer knows whom the image is of.
More then likely this procedure was done using the front mug shot the police took after booking him and was probably compared to, by the software, another mug shot of him from a previous arrest.
Just like it is movie make-believe that CSC agents can zoom into an image to 400% and hit some secret resolve key to make everything resolute and readable, what Hollywood shows us is possible with facial recondition is also mostly make-believe.
-
Just an FYI, facial recondition software does not work nearly as well as people think. You need a non-blurry in-focus image of a person's face from looking directly at them. If their head is even slightly angled in the image, the results will be skewed and inaccurate. Plus, you also need another image of similar composition in which the computer knows whom the image is of.
More then likely this procedure was done using the front mug shot the police took after booking him and was probably compared to, by the software, another mug shot of him from a previous arrest.
Just like it is movie make-believe that CSC agents can zoom into an image to 400% and hit some secret resolve key to make everything resolute and readable, what Hollywood shows us is possible with facial recondition is also mostly make-believe.
Reminded me of the Blow Up photographer losing his mind making deeper and deeper trips into his negative of the "murder" scene in the park. Film was cool, but there were limits!
-
Reminded me of the Blow Up photographer losing his mind making deeper and deeper trips into his negative of the "murder" scene in the park. Film was cool, but there were limits!
Limits!! "Blow UP" went way beyond any reasonable possible blow up...LOL
Peter