Josh suggest this story. Experimental software now under development can automatically swap eyes and facial expressions from one face to another, and the software is being tested as a way to anonymize faces that appear in Google Maps. This story is about more personal, more targeted, use of image-processing software. (NYT)
Ellen Robinson, a volunteer college trustee in Denver, commissioned
Sara Frances, a local photographer, to shoot a formal family portrait
to hang prominently in their new house. Working for $150 an hour, Ms.
Frances changed expressions of family members and swapped the dog’s
head between images. She slenderized bodies, adjusted skin tones and
changed the color of several outfits to make for a more unified
palette. She even straightened the collar on one son’s shirt.“You’re spending a lot of money on these portraits,” Ms. Robinson
said. “They’re supposed to last a lifetime — generations, really. So
why not get a helping hand to do it right?”Photography has always represented, to some degree, a distortion of
reality, said Per Gylfe, the manager of the digital media lab at the International Center of Photography
in New York. A photographer can create different impressions of the
same scene by including some elements in the frame and omitting others,
by changing lenses, or by tweaking the color and tone of the image in
the darkroom.“We’ve always taken photographs as proofs of events, and we probably never should have,” Mr. Gylfe said.
More than half of the teens surveyed believe journalists regularly engage in unethical behaviors like…
Pope Leo XIV, who has made peace and unity priorities of his pontificate, emphasized that…
My classes are generally small enough that I have time to get to know each…
View Comments
Jason, since I am a journalism teacher I am very conscious of the danger that comes when such an image is presented within a context that implies accuracy and verisimilitude. Manipulating image is a form of free speech, so artists, satirists, activists, and ordinary citizens should not be denied the opportunity. But when government-backed media production agencies or news organizations get into the act, the results can be very harmful.
You are right, of course, that publicizing instances in which an event was manipulated is a useful opportunity for people to discuss what they think should have happened.
Tasks like these are the testbed of countless advancements. Denying the freedom to express an event the way one believes it should be would make life bland and uninteresting. Manipulating events stimulates interests in other areas that could also be manipulated.