Woi since when you need a background in graphic algorithm to be good at photoshop? Then what about all those visual effects artists? You think they study algorithms ka?
Clear common sense Dyana/Zairil pics are real., Zairil bodoh sangat.
Clear common sense Dyana/Zairil pics are real., Zairil bodoh sangat.
|
Oct 20 2014, 07:50 PM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
Junior Member
86 posts Joined: Jan 2005 |
Woi since when you need a background in graphic algorithm to be good at photoshop? Then what about all those visual effects artists? You think they study algorithms ka?
|
|
Oct 20 2014, 07:56 PM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
Junior Member
86 posts Joined: Jan 2005 |
QUOTE(RiddleMeThat @ Oct 20 2014, 07:53 PM) You need that background to know how photoshop does blur, smudge and various other filters that helped to create forgeries. Doctoring photos and proving the photos are fake or real are 2 different things. Even more than a decade ago, the newspapers reported an Indian teenager who managed to realistically superimpose the heads of celebrities onto nude photos. You think he studied algorithms?As I said, please stop trying to be clever about such issues, many of you will embarrass yourselves in front of forensic investigators who study computer graphics algorithms. They need to know these to calculate and provide scientific/computer proof of whether a picture is doctored or not. |
|
Oct 20 2014, 08:05 PM
Return to original view | Post
#3
|
Junior Member
86 posts Joined: Jan 2005 |
QUOTE(RiddleMeThat @ Oct 20 2014, 08:00 PM) I don't care how good a photoshop user is. You cannot use the opinion of a photoshop expert to make a case in the court of law whether a picture is authentic or forged. Which is why I said you're answering two different things. The other poster asked if it was possible for it to be photoshopped and you insinuated that you need to have the technical background and algorithm know-how to do it. He didn't ask if it can be authenticated or how it'll hold up in court.The problem with most photoshop users or people like you who have no clue about image processing and computer graphics algorithms, your arguments are based on user skills and experience, which is total bunk and cannot be admitted as evidence to prove/disprove in the court of law. You're still using tools developed by programmers with computer graphics algorithm backgrounds, who used algorithms derived from experts/mathematicians. These are the people that would need to testify as to the authenticity of a photo with a proven and scientifically sound and proven algorithm model. If we try to use your argument in court to justify your case, your arguments will be completely destroyed and obliterated by the other side because you cannot produce the algorithmic and scientific models to argue and prove your case. |
Bump Topic Add ReplyOptions New Topic |
Change to: | 0.0157sec
0.29
6 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 09:23 PM |