| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
PS5's Content-Aware Fill
Jon House, Photographer, Student/Intern
 |
Portland | OR | | Posted: 3:26 PM on 03.25.10 |
->> Seamlessly edits out unwanted elements in your photo.
"The beauty of Content-Aware Fill is that it brings powerful editing capabilities — that were previously only accessible to experts — to the common user."
http://bit.ly/bdDhTA
I imagine that in certain photographic communities this will truly be a must-have feature. For news outlets, my worry is that as this type of technology because commonplace, and one-click simple to use, it could only further cast doubt on the authenticity of news (or sports) photography in the minds of readers. |
|
Butch Miller, Photographer
|
Lock Haven | PA | USA | Posted: 4:14 PM on 03.25.10 |
->> It is awesome what software can do ... but you are correct ... in the wrong hands tools like this can twist the truth effortlessly ...
I can see the day coming where ALL photo editors, publishers, etc. will only accept original untouched RAW files for editorial use and complete all processing in-house under strict supervision .... |
|
Jack Howard, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Central Jersey | NJ | USA | Posted: 4:31 PM on 03.25.10 |
->> Howard Jackson, CEO of the "Truthiness in Journalism" non-profit think tank has been pushing for the elimination of "quote marks" from keyboards, as this key makes it much too easy for any journalist to simply fabricate a statement and attribute it to some supposed eyewitness, expert, or hapless-passerby-on-the-street.
He recently said in a speech given to a captive audience (ok, his German Shepherd dog):
"[making "air quote" gesture wildly all the while] Quote marks make it too easy for unethical people to behave unethically by simply throwing quotes around a fabricated statement and attributing it to some supposed eyewitness, expert, or hapless passerby-on-the-street."
~~~~~~~
In other words: Evolutions of technology should not matter to those who will choose to behave ethically of their own accord, regardless of the tools available. |
|
Matt Cashore, Photographer
|
South Bend | IN | USA | Posted: 5:04 PM on 03.25.10 |
| ->> Whoa... |
|
Dave Breen, Photographer
|
Somerset | PA | USA | Posted: 5:35 PM on 03.25.10 |
| ->> People who take water-marked images from websites will be able to remove those pesky words from their prized photos. |
|
John Korduner, Photographer
 |
Baton Rouge | LA | United States | Posted: 6:31 PM on 03.25.10 |
->> I think you journalist types are putting too much faith in the tool...since it's an operation you're averse to using. I watched that video this morning and the one thing that caught my attention was how many times he'd use the tool and I thought to myself, "neat, but it still looks noticeably doctored." Then you'd hear, "and we'll touch that up later."
For web shots, or to garner love and attention from your mother, it'll probably be a godsend. But full resolution photos will still require the touch of sophisticated users in order to be truly convincing. |
|
Paul Alesse, Photographer
|
Centereach | NY | USA | Posted: 6:50 PM on 03.25.10 |
| ->> Even with all the touchups, that first photo is still horrible...LOL. I can't believe a photographer got paid to do that. |
|
John Korduner, Photographer
|
Baton Rouge | LA | United States | Posted: 7:02 PM on 03.25.10 |
| ->> Eh, the one thing my short time here has taught me...It's preferable to sell a horrible photo than to take a great one for free. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 9:08 PM on 03.25.10 |
->> I'd like to see the demo done on umbrella or softbox reflections on eyeglasses. The video is a sneak peak of a tool that is still being tweaked. There's plenty of retouching that goes into portraits and other non-editorial work that something like this will streamline.
For collages and other posters where sometimes the crop needed to make things fit means leaving a portion of a stick or bat or worse another person's arm or a leg this might, MIGHT, be able to clone in fence or grass in one easy step. |
|
James Broome, Photographer
|
Tampa | FL | US | Posted: 10:28 PM on 03.25.10 |
->> "In other words: Evolutions of technology should not matter to those who will choose to behave ethically of their own accord, regardless of the tools available."
Well said, Jack. Well said. |
|
Shawn Lynch, Photographer
|
New York | New York | USA | Posted: 11:02 PM on 03.25.10 |
| ->> I think this tool will be nice (if it works) for those of us not working on journalistic photos. Yes, there is a big potential for this tool to be used to mislead others by removing certain content from a photo, but I shoot a lot of architecture with wide angle lenses and often get flare, if it can fix that really well, I'd be pretty happy. |
|
Daniel Celvi, Photographer
|
Schaumburg | IL | United States | Posted: 2:42 AM on 03.26.10 |
->> Journalistic ethics aside, it does seem a pretty nifty tool. I'm sure it'll get tweaked some, but I still can't imagine it'll be great for big alterations. But imagine for dust spots! I remember my old camera had a horrifically dirty sensor (if related to a war veteran, that camera would have served as a private in WWI, captain in WWII, and general in the Korean War), or when I was scanning film, especially 4x5, there were always dust spots, or the occasional little hair, or whatever. For that type of use, I bet it'll be fantastic.
Used to take me hours to take spots out of scanned 4x5 neg's... |
|
Jack Kurtz, Photographer
|
Phoenix | AZ | United States | Posted: 4:28 AM on 03.26.10 |
->> Working photojournalists certainly know the ethics and know better than to use the very cool content aware tool.
But how many of our newspapers accept reader submitted photos, whether for the web or dead tree product, with no vetting of the photographers or photo. My guess is that pictures altered with the content aware tool are going to end up in our papers sooner rather than later.
The first time it happens on a big deal story some poor photo editor who was against the whole free, reader provided, content in the first place is going to get raked over the coals for not spotting the fraud by a publisher who suddenly grew ethical stones. |
|
Primoz Jeroncic, Photographer
|
Kranj | SI | Slovenia | Posted: 9:41 AM on 03.26.10 |
->> I'm not worried about misuse of this tool. Everyone in our business should have limits set, so I don't think this is Adobe's problem.
It's nice to hear development goes further (even if it's not usable for our work), but in this particular case, I'm wondering how is this even possible. On that video, you can't really see much of a photo, so I can't say anything if it's good or not. But stretching that panorama image looked really impressive and on that hard to see end photo I didn't have impression it would look all that bad. So my question starts here... does anyone really believe it's possible to produce this kind of action (without any data on big part of photo), without photo looking totally computer generated (repeating patterns etc.)? |
|
Butch Miller, Photographer
|
Lock Haven | PA | USA | Posted: 10:32 AM on 03.26.10 |
->> I agree it is definitely not a problem with Adobe offering a tool capable simplifying retouching ... as with all tools ... the good or bad the tool accomplishes is the result of the person using the tool ... not the folks who produce the tool. I for one plan to use it to streamline my workflow for portrait retouching ... with a clear conscious.
Unfortunately, those who work in the field of journalism are not immune to the laws of percentages of human behavior ... there are bad actors in every occupation ... there will be (and have been) some who will use this and other means to circumvent the true content of certain images to promote a particular point of view. Which as I pointed out earlier, this is just another factor that may force those who use images in journalism to apply even more strict practices.
Is the sky falling? I don't think so ... we just need to be ever vigilant in policing our ranks and make ourselves aware of abuse and intolerant of those abuses when they occur. |
|
Jack Howard, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|