Cool or Scary?
I can’t decide if this is really cool or really scary. Actually, it absolutely is really cool. So I guess the real question is whether or not it is scary. Or maybe the question is just how scary it really is from the perspective of a photographer.
The link below demonstrates some truly cool technology. It enables the resizing of images without losing the key subject matter in the images. From a purely technological perspective it is quite amazing. But from a photographic perspective it is at least a little scary.
We already have to contend with people asking if images were “Photoshoped”, with the insinuation that digital degrades the photographic experience. It seems many assume the best photographs are complete fabrications created in Photoshop.
As digital tools get more advanced every day, and the amount of control we can exercise over our images gets better and better, how will we define a photographic image, and how will we convince others that the image was a product of artistic talent (at least for the most part) and not purely a result of technological tools (though they obviously help)?
In any event, check out this video and decide for yourself, and feel free to post comments here.
Explore posts in the same categories: Technology
September 27th, 2007 at 11:10 am
Fascinating… it’s like a visual version of a text summarization tool. Definitely cool, and definitely scary. Particularly as it has the potential to “invisibly” alter an image.
When it comes the to application of technology I have a favorite saying - “just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.” Five hundred fonts on a CD and a desktop publishing program doesn’t make one a graphic artist - but it might result in a pretty horrendous Christmas letter. A bluetooth headset allows for handsfree phonecalls - but one doesn’t need to wear it 24 hours a day. (And responding to a blog is much more immediate than sending a letter to an editor - but it doesn’t necessarily mean I have anything worth saying!)
The question I would raise in response is: “When is application of this technology appropriate?” Do I want pictures I’ve taken “retargeted?” Maybe if I’m responsible for the resizing. But automatically in a web browser or other application? I’m not so sure about that.
Timothy
September 27th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
This is absolutly incredible. I think you once again have the need to use high quality camera equipment to capture a high quality image, however the possibilities of using this type of technology is very exciting. Remember we should embrace new technology not hold onto the past.
September 29th, 2007 at 7:52 am
Any new technology has the potential for being abused. Having said that, I would use in in a heartbeat on my own work to solve the problem that arises when an image demands a certain crop for aesthetic reasons and needs to end up at a specific aspect ratio…bring it on!
Winston Mitchell
Boise, Idaho
October 1st, 2007 at 6:51 pm
Tim,
Not scary at all unless the photographer’s clients demand total truth in their images. As a photographer/artist that presents the world around me as I see, feel and experience it, I’ll use any tool possible to express my vision.
When asked if my work has be “Photoshop’d” I simply reply, “Most definitely. Photoshop is my darkroom without the chemicals.” And I leave it at that. I find that most times they just want to argue the point and I have no desire to do that. As a matter of fact, it’s been quite a while since anybody asked about Photoshop.
This pass week I was in Michigan shooting and seeking gallery representation. One gallery owner asked me if my work was computer generated. I told her: “No, my work is generated by my own vision and skills. The camera and computer are simply tools I use to arrive at the final work of art.” Another gallery owner didn’t ask or care. She loved my work so much that she signed me up on the spot.
There will always be those that want to argue the point. Life is way too short to argue back.
October 2nd, 2007 at 7:18 am
Bruce:
The part I find “scary” is the misapplication of technology. As a photographer if you’re generating the images and using tools like this retargetting technology, no problem.
By the way, apparently a web-based app that uses this technology is available at http://rsizr.com.
Timothy
October 11th, 2007 at 5:48 am
I like the technology but its usefulness is limited. I took a random photo off of pbase.com, cropped it and rescaled it using the rsizr algorithm method. The result was less than pleasing. [wish I could show a comparison of the jpgs]
The original included Roman columns overlooking the sea, and the rsizr image was turned into a horrible image — the horizon was no longer level, the sea had a waterfall effect, and the distortion looked to alter the mountains and sea by many hundreds of feet. ANYONE could have looked at it and seen the distortion and known it had been altered. It was not usuable. I was not attempting to achieve anything except a panorama effect. In short, it didn’t work. The algorithm has its limits.
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:01 am
As a photojournalist, this software tool that distorts images to fit the space is unethical.
A photo is suppose to document reality, inform and to share honest information. This lowers the photograph to being simply a design tool. :-
November 12th, 2007 at 2:31 am
I find the technique excellant, but this is from a computor programmer view rather than my photographic sense.
This algorithm was not produced to ‘created photograghs’ but to allow images to be used on different display screens on the internet.
The current goal in web design is to get one web page to display well on screens from 24 inch wide screen to 2 inch cell phone screens so the user has a pleasent experience. The entire industry standard changed from fixed pages to CSS (cascading style sheets) that can adjust for screen size. While the page style could be changed to adjust to screen sizes, up to now images were stil fixed sizes (or several fixed sizes with programming deciding which to display).
If you accept the standard that web pages are intended only to give a pleasing experience and not to display art, then it might be easier to accept the software.