JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing | High Sierra Topix  

JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Topics covering photography and videography of the flora, fauna and landscape of the Sierra Nevada mountains. Show off your talent. Post your photos and videos here!
User avatar

JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby ERIC » Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:32 pm

New members, please consider giving us an intro!
Follow us on Twitter @HighSierraTopix. Use hashtags #SIERRAPHILE #GotSierra? #GotMountains?
Follow us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HighSierraTopix



User avatar
ERIC
Your Humble Host & Forums Administrator
Your Humble Host & Forums Administrator
 
Posts: 2909
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:13 am
Location: between the 916 and 661
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby copeg » Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:49 pm

I'm very interested in trying this, esp on a few of my photos I know to be 'edited', and a few I know were not 'edited'...just for kicks and giggles. Too bad there's no mac version
User avatar
copeg
Founding Member & Forums Administrator
Founding Member & Forums Administrator
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:25 pm
Location: Menlo Park, CA
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby ERIC » Mon Mar 16, 2009 2:21 pm

Let us know how it works for you. I'm also curious to know how accurate it really is.
New members, please consider giving us an intro!
Follow us on Twitter @HighSierraTopix. Use hashtags #SIERRAPHILE #GotSierra? #GotMountains?
Follow us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HighSierraTopix
User avatar
ERIC
Your Humble Host & Forums Administrator
Your Humble Host & Forums Administrator
 
Posts: 2909
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:13 am
Location: between the 916 and 661
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby TehipiteTom » Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:59 pm

Hmmm...I don't know about this:
In fairness however, the application doesn't have the capacity to judge the difference between a photo being cropped and getting a contrast adjustment in Photoshop versus, say, being cropped and having Godzilla added in, but it is a strong indicator of whether any editing has occurred.

If it really can't distinguish between cropping (full disclosure: I crop 80% of my images) and something like those ubiquitous over-processed HDR deals, then it doesn't sound all that useful.
User avatar
TehipiteTom
Founding Member
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 8:42 am
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby maverick » Mon Mar 16, 2009 4:17 pm

I took a look and said interesting, and then asked what is the purpose of this?
If your going to shoot in raw than you have you edit the photo no matter what
so what is the use?
Last edited by maverick on Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
maverick
Forums Moderator
Forums Moderator
 
Posts: 8029
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 5:54 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby SteveB » Mon Mar 16, 2009 11:13 pm

Mav is right... anyone shooting digital these days (and everyone shooting RAW) will be editing their images to some degree. From cropping to contrast adjustments to wholesale editing (I've removed telephone poles from a nice turn-of-the-century settler shack image) and obscene over-sharpening, people edit. How well you do it determines whether it's noticed or not. Nothing I hate more than an image that has the green kicked up too high and has been over-sharpened. The Iranian missile launch with 50 launchers in plain sight? Obvious, but hilarious... :)
User avatar
SteveB
Founding Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 10:08 pm
Location: Reno, NV
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby copeg » Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:43 am

maverick wrote:so what is the use?

Like I said, for kicks and giggles :) Actually I can see at least one use...in scientific journal submissions. I know of at least one journal that claims to perform routine checks (with I guess similar software) on submitted data.
User avatar
copeg
Founding Member & Forums Administrator
Founding Member & Forums Administrator
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:25 pm
Location: Menlo Park, CA
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby SSSdave » Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:46 pm

Maybe useful for current event newspaper submissions. What value is unedited photographs out of a digital camera if the result is unnatural? The one thing of value with such a program might be to prove graphic content is real. RAW certainly doesn't deliver close to natural and neither does 99+% of what comes out of digital cameras unless they have pricy calibration like commercial product photographers so even if someone wanted natural they wouldn't be able to deliver it.

There are two basic divisions, graphic changes and luminance and color changes. A lot of photographers used to refrain from much graphic manipulation but that ethic has been receding quickly. For landscape work most manipulated work on color and luminance is obvious. Better is to simply look at a photographer's body of work that make such instantly obvious. Today the landscape and nature status quo is unnatural contrasty and saturated. Those that have an interest in reasonably natural work as per my style are uncommon.
User avatar
SSSdave
Topix Fanatic
 
Posts: 1965
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:18 pm
Location: Silicon Valley
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby markorr » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:54 pm

SSSdave wrote:Today the landscape and nature status quo is unnatural contrasty and saturated. Those that have an interest in reasonably natural work as per my style are uncommon.


I realize I'm going to open a can of worms by saying this, but....what is "natural"? As perceived by the viewer of the event? If so how do you account for variations in perception? Is unmanipulated once captured, natural? Then how do you account for different white balance etc settings on the camera or for the old school, for differences in shutter speed (particularly true for photographing moving water). I personally don't do much manipulation in silico, mostly b/c I don't like to be on the computer that much, however I will adjust crooked images or alter contrast, etc if I like the basic content of the image. For me personally its about communicating how I feel about the image.

BTW most scientific journals in the biology realm look for altered images. They have pretty stringent rules on how images can be manipulated and how you make it clear that its been altered. My day job is a bench scientist so I run into this a lot, both in presenting data and reviewing others.
User avatar
markorr
Topix Acquainted
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:25 pm
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby copeg » Wed Mar 18, 2009 12:40 pm

markorr wrote:BTW most scientific journals in the biology realm look for altered images. They have pretty stringent rules on how images can be manipulated and how you make it clear that its been altered. My day job is a bench scientist so I run into this a lot, both in presenting data and reviewing others.
I misread your first sentence and thought "that ain't right", until I understood your point (at least, I think I did) - I read it as they look (as in look to publish) altered images :eek:
User avatar
copeg
Founding Member & Forums Administrator
Founding Member & Forums Administrator
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:25 pm
Location: Menlo Park, CA
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby SSSdave » Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:06 pm

This thread is not the place to hijack into a more general discussion about image manipulation and fidelity. You or anyone else is welcome to email me directly or start such a thread independently. On my home page you might select the sub-page link to my "Philosophy and Style" essay. And there is considerable one can find by searching for "image AND manipulation" on the web. You would find my real name in a fair number of forum discussions going back many years.

For the sake of a minimal reply I'll offer a terse comment that doesn't directly address your question but merely shows such questions are but the tip of a large iceberg of issues that can quickly get out of control unless narrowly focused.

marksfor >>>"what is "natural"? As perceived by the viewer of the event?"

A better term would be "reasonably natural". An argument often tossed out is that since a photograph can never exactly represent a scene and moment in time, why bother thus it might as well be anything goes. In ordinary lingo an example of tossing the baby out with the bathwater fallacy.
User avatar
SSSdave
Topix Fanatic
 
Posts: 1965
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:18 pm
Location: Silicon Valley
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: JPEGSnoop Sniffs Out Signs of Editing

Postby ERIC » Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:09 pm

SSSdave wrote:This hread is not place to hijack the discussion into a more general discussion about image manipulation and fidelity.


Nah. Quite the contrary, I sort of posted this article to stimulate discussion. :littledevil:

So long as it remains civil. :)
New members, please consider giving us an intro!
Follow us on Twitter @HighSierraTopix. Use hashtags #SIERRAPHILE #GotSierra? #GotMountains?
Follow us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HighSierraTopix
User avatar
ERIC
Your Humble Host & Forums Administrator
Your Humble Host & Forums Administrator
 
Posts: 2909
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:13 am
Location: between the 916 and 661
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

Next

Return to High Sierra Photography / Videography



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest