A U.K. woman was photographed standing in a mirror where her reflections didn’t match, but not because of a glitch in the Matrix. Instead, it’s a simple iPhone computational photography mistake.

  • falkerie71
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    You don’t need a few whole seconds to put an arm down.

    Edit: I should rephrase. I don’t think computational photography algorithms would risk compositing photos that are whole seconds apart. In well lit environments, one photo only needs 1/100 seconds or less to expose properly. Using photos that are temporally too far apart risk objects moving too much in the frame, and thus fail to composite.

    • Odelay42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s three different arm positions in a single picture. That doesn’t happen in the blink of an eye.

      The camera is taking many frames over a relatively long time to do this.

      This is nothing at all like rolling shutter, and it’s very obvious from looking at the example in the article.

      • LifeInOregon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Those arm positions occur over the course of a fluid motion in a single second. How long does it take for you to drop your hands to your side or raise them to clasped from the side? It doesn’t take me more than about half a second as a deliberate movement.

      • llii@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It takes you several seconds to move your arm? I hope you don’t do manual work.

        Also did you use the iOS camera app before? You can see how long it takes for the iPhone to take multiple shots for the always-on hdr feature, and it isn’t several seconds.

      • Decoy321@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s three different arm positions in a single picture. That doesn’t happen in the blink of an eye.

        It’s a lot faster than you might be expecting. I found it helps to visualize it in person. Go to a mirror and start with your hands together like in the right side mirror. Now let your arms down naturally, to the position in the left side mirror. If you don’t move your arms at the same exact time, one elbow will still be parallel to the floor while the other elbow has extended already, just like in the middle position.

        Thus, we can tell that the camera compiled the image from right to left.

      • falkerie71
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I can also see the three arm positions being a single motion, just in three different time frames. If it really takes seconds to complete a composite, then it should also be very easy to reproduce, and not something so rare it makes it into the news. If I still can’t convince you, I guess we agree to disagree then.

        • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          then it should also be very easy to reproduce, and not something so rare it makes it into the news.

          And it is, according to the article. Just in case you haven’t read.

          It has made headlines not because it’s rare, but because it’s outrageous. Just in case you haven’t noticed.

          • falkerie71
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Please, feel free to reproduce one yourself then. And no, using the panorama trick doesn’t count, which I think the “silly photos” in the article may be actually referencing instead of this.

            And is it really “outrageous”? At most I think this is amusing. Nowhere in the article gave me the impression that this is something that people need to be extremely angry about, Mr. Just in case.