Smartphone Cameras vs Reality!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ธ.ค. 2021
- Thoughts on computational photography bending the definition of a "photo"
Sponsored by Cash App: Download from App Store/Google Play store - Use code MARQUES for $15 and $10 goes to Girls Who Code!
MKBHD Merch: shop.MKBHD.com
Tech I'm using right now: www.amazon.com/shop/MKBHD
Playlist of MKBHD Intro music: goo.gl/B3AWV5
~
/ mkbhd
/ mkbhd
/ mkbhd - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
I can’t wait till the latest camera feature will be “Real Mode” where it just takes a picture of what’s really there 🤪
Pixel phones are actually the closest to the reality. It shows all your wrinkles & imperfections.
🤪
@@jeremybrosalejos1603 yeah, if changing dark into bright is what you call "real" photo
@@adiirfan01 you got me there...haha.. except night mode.
you joke, but it would be nice to have an option to turn it off at the very least.
Felt like I was watching a mini Black Mirror episode...
this video was a different experience, I totally agree.
Trippy
I mean there was one with the AR eyes changing the person's reality to make the military enemy literal monsters or making a shitty looking abandoned house into a great looking mansion
how many subs can I get from this comment? Current: 320
This was my first thought.
This video makes me think of the painted portraits people use to have to sit through for hours before photography was accessible. The folks requested a portrait and it was up to the artist to render the ideal image of that person even if it didn't reflect reality. If you look up different portraits of famous people from pre-1800s, portraits of the same person can look completely different depending on the artist. Same with sculptures. I think choice is most important here; give us the choice of what style we want our pictures in, whether it's completely raw or heavily edited.
This is genius!! Never thought of it that way......
History indeed repeats itself, huh...
that was unavoidable, artists back then simply aren't good enough to draw photorealistic people. this is intentional.
@@ironwoodbranch6720 fr
Completely raw doesn't really exist - all photos are the product of choices made by the equipment hardware and software maker as well as the photographer.
Security camera: "Hmm this picture is dark and noisy, but that definitely looks like a gun to me. Let me just draw a gun in the suspect's hands"
ohhh, god, as long as they don’t change up the skin color
When he said "these cameras are outputting captures of moments in time that never really happened", that hit real hard.
He says it at 7:40 btw. Its just difficult to imagine how AI is twisting reality and creating this façade over whats real. I mean photos are usually meant to capture moments in time so you can look back and remember what it was like, which is why i found what he said kinda disturbing.
me too. i don't want "fake" photos, those have no value for me. the value is the moment you capture, which is unique to you.
But are they really? Or is it just our association with them?
For journalistic and historic purposes I'm with you.
But besides that.... before photography was invented - artists made paintings of people.
But these where expensive and only rich people could afford that. And all those historic paintings NEVER depict true, accurate reality.
Then photography came along and democratized capturing memories for the common man.
Photos are much more about freezing a particular memory rather than portraying truth in that sense.
Otherwise we wouldn't tamper with photos in lightroom and photoshop. No one tries to recreate the boring, normal colors we see.
Mostly people try to "enhance" their picture in some ways. Just a small change of contrast is already a manipulation of "reality" in that sense. And has even been done before computers in the dark room with analog film. A lot of manipulation is done within the film development process and the end product is always the "vision" of the photographer - not the true reality as it was in that moment. 🤔
That can already be done with post-processing. How much can it really change things when its already possible with a bit of work?
hey Vsauce, Michael here...
Begs the question though. Can we ever? Look at film, the first method of truly capturing light at a point in time in a format that can be viewed later. There is differences between film stocks, camera lens, grain, sharpness; these all result in different versions of the same reality. Perhaps its philosophical.
I'm OK with them offering the options that bend reality, but I'm not OK with them implementing the reality bends without giving you the choice to turn them off, and without informing you that they are being used.
I like when the google photos app offers suggested changes but I dont need to do them. I think that's how virtually all the AI adjustments should be. Smaller stuff like the smart telephoto on the iphone is fine when shooting auto, but once it starts making any larger adjustments I want to be notified and able to stop it.
@@TheTonVeron tbh I would prefer to be able to force the telephoto lens on my iPhone, like I know the photo might be worse, just give me the option to do it
I believe that we should see if a photo has been merged from a couple different points in time, for example like Google’s “Night Sight” shows up when viewing a picture on Android
I agree , I would love to have control and change the image how I wanted. Basically having options to turn on and off is great. My current phone thankfully can disable the ai thing ( it called scene optimiser on my phone )
Ikr, I took a pic in a dark room with no lights in the room that I took pic in, but my phone made in so bright that you can say there's 100% lights there's
What about videos. Why have all videos become 30fps? If i shoot a video at 240fps, i want the output to be 240fps, not 30fps.
Marques not only predicted a version of magic eraser (taking a picture of a popular Instagram wall and it wiping out all the people in front of it) but literally also Best Take. Well done. 👏
I was just thinking the same thing now that I watched this video today!.
Every camera basically building Photoshop right between the capture and print layers now...
No, this is the exact opposite of photoshop. While PS lets you do whatever tf you want, this algorhythms completely devests you of your personal artistc freedom, streamlining every picture for perfect social media compatibility, making "artistic" photography with a smartphone more and more impossible. Technology starts patronising us.
@@lukaslanger8077 no no ps let the user do what they want. And in this case the user is AI
Oh
Well fortunately for us, Sony is still giving us true to life images with none of those AI enhancement. Unfortunately Marques think they look "dull".
I think it's sad.
As a photographer, one of the most common things I encounter, especially with younger clients, is that they would prefer the picture (selfie) taken on their smartphone compared to the pictures I took with perfect lightning and editing. Mostly because my edit still shows them as they actually are and not how they wish to be seen.
So I can only imagine this technology will keep moving forward because it is what people want nowadays, they don't want the real thing, they want an image that complies with today's superficial standards. I take a lot of pictures on my phone myself, but I turn all the automatic AI features off to somewhat have control. But I understand completely the need of just snapping a picture you're happy with without editing, I just feel they should remain somewhat "Realistic" :-)
yup，they lost their realistic apperance. instead, they like the filter as (fully ai retouch)
People these days dont know the purity and value of art
Yes, I have the same thing. I'm doing a wedding, taking candid & posed shots from the guest at the reception. People stop me "Can you take a picture" and I ready my camera... "no no, with my phone". And indeed, everyone looks "better" (according to IG/FB/TikTok standards) in that photo. And when I take a photo myself with my actual camera, some want to see the result and they go like "aargh I'm so ugly". And they do prefer the ones taken by the smartphone. The phones soften the skin, especially in low light, for starters. Not only because they look better/younger, but also because they look like everyone else on social media. Which is kinda ridiculous if you think about it. What's even more ridiculous, is the fact that people, real people at that very moment, you know, the people you talk to and have fun with, see their realistic version at that moment, not the AI-improved version. But apparently that's less important. How crazy is that. I'm thinking this will all only get worse in the future. I have feeling that people seeing their nateral self (even with full blown make-up), will be the new "nude", and the AI filtered, improved versions will be the new "dressed" in the minds of future generations. Also don't underestimate the trend on plastic surgery to make people actually look like filter X on TikTok. But that's a different discussion.
I clearly try not to spend too much thoughts about it.
x to doubt, a good 85mm portrait shot is MUCH MORE appealing than a shitty phone portrait with fake blur.
Oh my shit, I can relate to this so much.
I like to edit my photos to have a little flair in coloring but ultimately still look grounded in reality so no ultra blue skies or searing reds.
So I take this amazing portrait, its like perfect in my eyes, focus on point, the lighting is just right, and the afternoon colors just seeping in from the window feeling cozy.
Then I hand over the photo later and while they politely thank me for it, I can't help but notice how they seem show more excitement at their phone selfies.
Even some people have asked me to up the saturation and contrast to the detriment of the photo.
It's especially discouraging when I saw my friend lose out on a photography contest to a generic oversaturated and oversharpened collection of photos.
Art is very subjective I know, but sometimes I feel lost on whether to just follow through with what I've learned or just mimic the style of smartphone photos since people seem to react more positively to that style.
I feel like this is exactly one of those things were most people will say: "Cool! But let me turn it off." That example at the end of the video is an amazing one, as someone who takes most of his interesting pictures in somewhat tourist-y areas, I always hate realising that there are still a few people in the shot after I've already left, or don't get to take the shot I want because I'm in a hurry and don't have the time to wait for people to leave. In those cases, of course it would be amazing to just get a 'perfect' picture with my phone within seconds. But even though it'll be a pretty photo, and it provides a somewhat romanticized memory of that moment, it isn't what really happened. As long as there's still a toggle for all these features, preferably big and on the main screen instead of buried in a settings menu somewhere, it's a cool evolution. Even though it's somewhat scary to think what else it could be used for.
Pixel 6 image software can erase people off pictures right?
@@sendoh7x it’s not magic, it’s just photoshop, which you can just port the photo over there
@@sendoh7x and it doesn’t work perfectly, it fills in the space with similar patterns around the area you want to fill in.
Zero chance they will give you an option, just like they never gave us one with the stuff they're already doing for years
Yeah, I agree mostly I''d just want to be able to easily toggle things off. Like honestly in a group selfie or w/e I don't care if technically there was never a moment that all our eyes were open. But I also expect than sometimes it will try to be "helpful" and actually make things worse, like excel changing certain numbers to dates without asking. I'm a person who likes to know how things work, but not super "techie" in my behavior most of the time so I'd probably leave it on, but want to know when to turn it off to get what I want.
6:48 You guessed it
No way he did
He even knew it was gonna be the pixels.. Wth? Maybe some early news were leaked cus this sounds too good to be true
IKR!
Your videos are so deep and well thought of, it's like everytime you make a video it's something we didn't know we needed. They are such eye openers. Well done 👍
⚠️ 7:02 This feature was present on BlackBerry 10 phones. When you took a picture of the group of people the phone took multiple shots and then you could've choose different faces for up to 5 people I think. It was called "Time Shift".
Blackberry 10 was an amazing operating system that never took off.
Bump
I believe Xiaomi had this feature for a bit as well, simply named "Group Selfie". I remember it back in 2019 when I first got my Mi 9. But... Seems like its been removed. I can't find the setting anywhere now. But there's some bits of it left out there in forum posts haha.
I came to also mention this. BB10 was fantastic. I still have my BB10 and booted it up the other day. Still such a super fast and snappy OS....If only a updated version of BB10 with new cameras, new processors, more storage, and more importantly....APPS!
@@13ballom the same features iphone fanboys use to hate on blackberry is on iPhones now...bb10 was ahead of it's time, now all the phones want to be like that OS... social media apps and artificial cameras took over phones ...
"these cameras are outputting captures of moments in time that never really happened" - great idea; thinking what legal implications photos will have taken by AI cameras
Imagine some kind of kidnapping/sexual abuse crime case and the defending side submits a picture of the victim "smiling/consenting" as a proof of consent when in reality that was never the case! That would be a pretty bad scenario.
In the Kyle Rittenhouse trial a few weeks ago they refused to let in a cropped/zoomed version of a video because the scaling method (bicubic interpolation) changes pixels from the original. It's a bit odd though, because the original video was shot on a phone that automatically alters the capture with it's own algorithm.
@@megalith7796 Agreed. It could also go the other way as well. Eg someone who is laughing hysterically with their eyes closed, could look terrified if their eyes were edited open.
it would also make it harder for an unknowing victim to defend themselves legally, when they have actual evidence but it gets slammed down because the evidence is "insufficient."
@@megalith7796 that sound straight out of black mirror episode
I'm not OK with that. Thank you for this video, Marques. Never realized before now how crazy 'advanced' smartphone photo processing became. Editing apps are perfectly fine, but photo editing should not be automatic and hidden within the process of taking the photo. I prefer reality, as imperfect as it may be.
Totally agreed ❤️
We saw this alot with Snapchat. I remember in school years ago people only took selfies in Snapchat because it "looked better" in reality it was just a filter on the standard camera (without applying any filter manually). Now it's the standard for a bunch of apps
I agree....
Same here, I also prefer more natural look without make up.
So smartphones are not your ideal photography tool. A DSLR or film camera may be your cup of tea.
It's making me appreciate "traditional" point and shoot or DSLR photography more. At least I'll know that everything in the photo will be real. I went out to shoot landscape with my pixel 6 pro recently because I figured it would be an easier and more convenient than using my dslr. It was also a excited to try all the new cam features like motion blur. While the camera is probably good enough for taking impressive day to day photos with friends, it lacks so much compared to a DSLR when to comes to nature photography.
buy sony smartphone
This also makes me worried DSLR/Mirrorless cameras will begin adopting these computational processes from smartphones, which is fine only as long as the option remains to turn them off.
@@Yougimpytube It always will have an option to turn it off on a mirrorless/dslr camera. 2 reasons for that 1) most professionals use DSLR/mirrorless cameras and they shoot photos in RAW and 2) many of these "edits" are done to JPEG formats... so the option to turn these off will be there otherwise everybody will have to shoot in RAW format which then hurts the companies sales if the person buying the camera is a beginner/intermediate photographer or anybody that prefers to shoot only in JPEG format.
(although I don't understand why someone would ever shoot in compressed JPEG over RAW other than file size reasons but some people really do prefer to edit JPEGS for some odd reason).
Also another point, mirrorless cameras and DSLRs will not be able to do these things (not for the near future atleast) since this level of computational photography requires very powerful processing chips and proper camera companies are most likely not going to invest in that.
Just my thoughts on this. I always shoot RAW on my Sony A7iii anyways so this fake "ready to post" edited thing doesn't bother me.
@TheEditor107 not the best camera but the best software customised
That's why it called smart phone fool
I’m honestly somewhat concerned that this will mesh a little too well with the whole meta verse concept, especially with these cameras being able to edit our facial features in such subtle ways and as Marques says, capture moments in time that never happened. This seems to be leading us to romanticizing our memories and our appearance, especially with the cropping distractions out of our pictures like advertised on the Google Pixel 6. While I’m not too worried about it as long as a toggle is available, I still feel like we’re rapidly moving towards a society with two halves, one in the metaverse and one in reality.
This technoligy was here for years and they never gave us a toggle option. What makes you think they'll give us one in the futur?
Metaversians and realitatians... Who you gonna be?
there's something called photoshop.......
KILL METAVERSE
@@fernandocamarillo3710 that’s a program that people have to go out of their way to use and edit their photos, this is something that’s done whether we like it or not
I love these thought videos you make lately! Keep going!
how do you have 200k subscribers and get a total of 4 thousand views per video
@@gang-yc4je bot subs or bought subs
@@sudorights Marques has 15 million subscribers, but 'only' a few million views per video.
Are you saying he also has bought subs? 😉
Woah
Mkbhd: “i’v been doing it for past 10 years but I’ll keep going I guess “
This is my first time watching your video, but I’m so glad the algorithm brought me to this video. I’ve been thinking a lot about this topic, and to be able to process with actual examples from different phones. Thank you so very much for this video!
Very good talk. I've already been pretty frustrated for years seeing more and more heavily edited photos all over the places. Reflecting the real world should always be the ultimate motivation of taking a photo in my opinion
Meanwhile Sony's approach to cameras and photos were under appreciated.
What is a Sony?
@@riffraff9070 Sony? So-knee
So kneel and hold deez LMFAO
Exactly.. SONY always go for a more natural & neutral colour approach than an over saturated or pre-edited/post processed images that you see from other Brands
@@riffraff9070 go watch xperia pro i review from Extreme Reviews
they should have tried harder at the "phone" part, incredibly garbage user experience.
The group photo shot, if someone is blinking, they had this feature on the very first Samsung Note, where it would choose all the best faces and put it all into one photo, actually worked really well, Im surprised they havent done that with future phones since, it just makes sense to have that feature.
I think this is what photo studios do often on group photos. And they propably don't allways ask either.
heck, google photos used to do this when you burst photos. It would pick the best smiles and create a new photo with the merges.
Its a nice feature, but the problem arises when it happens without user input. A lot of people would argue that a non-perfect natural image is better. A real family classic where your dad is busy yelling at the dog or something
@@arzheus1313 for full realism just have a grid of separate pics
@@arzheus1313 true
Great exposure of smart phone camera functions, interesting topic and commentary! What about the apps that we can use in smart phones that allow for manual controls, do they allow us to see at least the true performance of the components? Cheers to you and your team!
Definitely one of the most interesting, entertaining, eery, and funny video I’ve seen from the channel. Someone said it felt like a black mirror episode and they are right, now I have to go watch Hang the DJ( Black Mirror) to feel more in tune with the dystopian side of our future! Nice job on the video.
I've been wondering about the legal implications of this. Is it possible that computational photography gets to a point where it's inadmissible evidence in court, because they are a program's interpretation of reality? What if you took the Pixel 6 feature mentioned around 6:00 in this video, and added facial recognition? So the software notices a blurry face, but it detects who it is from your Google Photos account and super-imposes their clear face onto the photo? That's probably possible with today's technology.
But what if that photos was submitted as evidence in a court case? Is it really a photo of a person at a crime scene? Or is it Google's software's best guess of who was in the photo, and enhanced using software?
Very good point. I can see same thing happening with deep fakes. Its fairly easy to tell right now but looks how far they've come in just a few years? Without knowledge of deep fakes many videos can look authentic enough to casual viewers. Give it 10 more years and any video evidence brought into court will need to be checked by forensics experts for signs of being fake. My guess is when deep fakes get really good and easy to do on any phone its inevitable some will make it past any checks and wrongly put some people in jail.
When that day happens, no one will ever trust video evidence again and this has some really huge and really terrible ramifications.
didnt someone wrongly argue in court that a video could not be used because apple automatically ai upscales on ipads when you in lol
@@natetaylor9071 yup. It happened in the Kyle Rittenhouse case and the judge agreed with it.
@Viktor Reeds nah, no evidence got up scaled in the rittenhouse trial. The prosecution sent the defense team a video and it got compressed into lower quality.
I think photoshop already exists for that matter and being used in many cases.. fake videos , fake photos are already there on internet.. u can see any celebrity nude like seriously wth!! 😐
Drag Marques is not real, he can’t hurt you
5:42
Man your content is so creative and insightful, that its just a delight to watch
Once again absolutely brilliant narration. Thanks Marcus your vids are a pleasure to watch.
Fascinating video, thank you.
Hey i know you!
This is the kind of reviews and insights that keep MKBHD different, thanks for making and sharing your thoughts. It's an important topic to discuss as AI creeps more and more into our daily lives
Great video. Good that you kept this within 10 minutes. I think most topical videos like this should be short and sweet!
Marques asking questions I never even knew I had. That's why you videos are amazing. Looking at things a different way.
This even brings up a bigger conversation of the legality of it all. Would we ever reach a point where photos or videos taken from a phone would no longer be acceptable legal evidence?
true
I think that was the case in Rittenhouse’s trial. The prosecution couldn’t prove that a picture (I think it was a frame actually) wasn’t tampered with, so the judge didn’t accept it as evidence. Which, IMO, is the correct approach.
This is alarming.
great question...
That was specifically about pinching and zooming on an already pixelated image
You know it's about to get serious when the new MKBHD video doesn't start off with a fire intro 😳
I could totally see that happening! Great insights, Marque
This is hands down one of the best videos you have ever made. These are things that I've thought about myself
This is definitely true and something the mainstream wants, without realizing the potential consequences. For example, my family always wants to pose for photos, make sure that the lighting is good, smile and they always use the filters on the camera to change the color and make adjustments and then before posting on instagram they do even more filter applying and editing to look skinnier, etc. They always complain about me and my pictures because I prefer to take hundreds of candid photos of random moments when they're not paying attention or when they least expect it. And sure, a lot of those look blurry and have shit lighting, but within the hundred snapshots, when I manage to snag a picture of a genuine hug with a smile from getting a gift that no one was playing instagram influencer for.. THOSE are the pictures that have value to me. And there's no amount of editing that will replace them.
Agreed. The imperfect photos have a charm and a nostalgia the posed ones can't match.
furry therefore opinion invalidated
I have found my people
I second this so much!
Actually, my siblings and I made a photobook as a present for our mom, where we collected every candid shot of her since she had the feeling that she only had posed pictures because usually she's the one running around with a camera and then has to force others to take one picture with her in it aswell. She was blown away by all these photos we found from several past years that she is now in support of many candid shots aswell.
When I was twelve my family went on a "Big Two-Week Vacation"(tm) around Arizona. Easily the most elaborate vacation we had gone on to that point. Everyone but me took photos where everyone was carefully-posed and the result was they all looked like wooden statues. My photos were either shots of just the landscape, or candid shots of people when they didn't know I was taking a photo. Everyone looked much more like a Real Person in the candid shots.
As long as you can still take raw, high detail, photos as an option in these future apps I'm all for it. There are moments where you want or choose the real moment, captured flaws and all in crisp detail. Thanks for the video, AI editing is a blessing even though it can seem creepy.
Depends on your objective and your overall preference but yeah
I agree with you!
As for me most of the time I’m editing my photos with using Lightroom app. I decide what color I put to some objects but the con is that it takes some time like 5 mins or even 2 hrs. Anyways I love editing my photos.
Combining data from more than one sensor to increase the detail or depth of field of the photo is always a plus.
That's why iPhone takes wurst pics
Whoa... mind blowing. Great food for thought, Marques! I expect these things will happen eventually. But I hope there will always be a way to know when a photo is not a photo (real).
Fabulous video, you are taking your videos to the next level with such thought-breaking content..
I feel like it goes to a certain extent. For me, ai in cameras is fine when it is making colors better, smoother images, removing blur, etc. But when it's changing reality to where it's a "better" or "prettier" version that's where I draw the line
Well ai in say security uses the same camera and ai so basically privacy is gone and also all those filters I even think causes some especially with a personality distorter so it's not even them anymore and we are not perfect we have imperfections and say growing old well lots of women now are getting Botox just bc of pictures and video
I thought the adjustment of eye size and hairline was a bit freaky but smoothening skin and making your face a bit more symmetrical that it appears in a particular shot changes reality but in a subtle way
Okay so my take is this:
- Features like the Pixel ones where you can choose a good photo out of 10, are genuinely useful. Try to photograph a kid without it. The great thing about it is, you have all the dials. It doesn't lie to you or hide the details. It's just like, here, this might help, also you can use it as a short video, or not use it at all.
- Features where it changes the colors or the saturation or overlays a pre-existing image over the real one are downright creepy IMO. I want my photos to reflect the reality. Maybe allow me to do what you're offering IF i want to but most importantly allow me to disable, or better yet, don't enable it by default.
I guess it's more about whether the objective of the feature is assisting you in selection and taking accurately exposed and stable pictures, or lying to you so you get a more "pleasing" reality with no possibility of turning it off.
Your way of thinking is really interesting, we've been able to more or less choose the colors and change the saturations on photos for the longest time, it even happens when you shoot film, but that scares you the most over an AI thats choose a better face for your pictures. It's all subjective anyway but I think it's interesting
@@Lenak_ I’m with you on that one lmao Fujifilm made it’s life on saturated color film and even now is well regarded for the color profiles on its mirrorless cameras.
yeah man
we should have given the option to turn on/off AI mode.
I draw the line at image overlaying.
IMO things like saturation and brightness are fair game. NO CAMERA gives you the same color that your eyes see (it might even be different from other people's eyes). Astrophotographers give you magnificent images of the milkyway with all its nebula, yet my eyes could only see dots of stars in a clear dark sky.
Yes the motion capture on the pixel is very useful and I fully agree with everything in this comment
the little bloop sound (8:38) is the same as the first tone when your AirPods are dying and it psychs me out each time
I do appreciate your ethical thoughts on this topic. This is something people will have to deal with for sure at some point. Since i switched from the Iphone 11 to the Iphone 13 i am more often unhappy with the overprocessed outcome of the photos. When taking a photo and then opening it right away, you can see that it sometimes takes half a second and then magic is applied that is non reversible. As of the Iphone13 this is so much, that i started using my regular camera again.
I think you answered your own question: smartphone cameras becoming smarter are just doing what the 'pros' have been doing for years when they photoshop images. They're helping the masses level up their image tuning skills. I think that's a good thing, but people likely won't even realise it's happening...and that's not great.
I would say increased awareness is a must. It would be great if camera systems showed info on each image letting you know what edits it went through, a sort of 'edit history' that anyone can view (maybe it's in the meta data?). Imagine it had some sort of % change the image underwent, or 'reality correction %'. Might help people keep some grip on reality if they could see this sort of data.
But how long until the same image processing is applied to everything via smart AR glasses..? Reality is rapidly becoming what our devices make it.
I doubt that the majority of people would care about this even in the slightest.
I have a question, why would awarness be needed in the case of image processing if the smartphones would to take "a perfect photo" , because people mainly want it, and I assume that for such a case you could edit those type of things after, I image it would work like if you where to use a built in camera feature that saturerates the image, doubt that they would make it without the ability to edit it yourself after
I presume you find the hyper sharpening of the Pixel 6 desirable?
I agree with this
"These cameras are outputting captures of moments in time that never really happened"... This line sent me into deep thoughts!
Your videos are getting increasingly philosophical and I love it.
2.3 million views in under 2 weeks, that's amazing. So I decided to watch and learn! You really made me think about smart phones and their level of technology which is now at another level and that's a bit spooky. Anyway, a great video, thanks, from a UK fan!
The AI's distortion on reality could easily become a danger with removing or edit objects out of the original capture. ie: a court preceding where a picture of the defense holding a gun up to someone is removed because the AI won't allow it, or a protest sign is altered from something that meets the AI's from something that is controversial.
Why would "AI" remove objects from an original capture though?in what world would that appeal to consumers?
@@govardhanposina17 Propaganda, illegal activity, anything that goes against the state, anything that can be seen as controversial. Noone would WANT that, but authorities and countries may FORCE it without consent.
With all that is going on with deepfakes and all captured images, videos and audio will have very little bearing in court in the future. We might as well get used to that idea.
But think of the dating profile applications! Stuff "moon mode", give me "90s Brad Pitt" mode! Now THAT'S a feature I'd want on my phone!
...Now if only the phone could change the reality to match the picture, instead of the other way around...
@@lightninboy100 deepfakes and computational camera AI are two different things though,just because MKBHD chooses to use the word AI doesn't mean they are the same thing
This is a brilliant breakdown of modern smartphone photography consists of and all the small tweaks that your camera makes without you even knowing. A great debate and thought sparker laid our very eloquently Marques.
Thank you marques, great knowledge shared by you! thanks a lot man
Loved the video
Thank You for such information
It's a good thing there are alternatives, like what Sony delivers lately : focusing not on computational photography but bringing the user experience closer to a real camera. From Xperia 1 ii onwards, their phones capture incredible photos, when shooting in RAW + a bit of editing in Lightroom, for good measure
@King Pistachion obama 2?!!
@King Pistachion Can't wait for apple to make donald trump 2, I have no idea on how politic works.
too bad people don't like them precisely for being real
Honestly, I really like what Google and Apple did this year. Google managed to capture my skin tone the best out of most smartphone cameras, and Apple's Photographic Styles are good for all different preferences of photos.
Realism is dying, but the little bits of realism that we do get is always appreciated.
Realism is dying while HDR is diagrammatic
how many subs can I get from this comment? Current: 320
Good explanation Marque
Good content! I'd say you're actually ahead of time. We'll definitely be seeing this kinda video contents in the future.
One of your best video’s, thanks Marques! ♥️
And I love the absence of background music: it greatly enhances focus.
I'm definitely not ok with something else taking liberties, I actually love the imperfections of photos; they feel authentic
Preach
I've been waiting for this video
rlly great ideas!!
Nothing in photography is about capturing "reality"
Especially on social media.
The moon is ‘upside down’ in the Southern Hemisphere. It would be interesting to see if the same image is superimposed regardless of location. You could turn off location to check as well.
@Zaydan Naufal All you need is one phone. There are millions of millionaires in the southern hemisphere.
Awesome explanation, this is eyeopener
Best philosophy i have heard on tech photography is heading in recent times. I guess cameras and computational photography is coming up to speed with the image (not matter how unrealistic) we have of ourselves comes true, at least in a photo
I think that Google's doing exactly what you said about object erasing. Sometimes it works almost perfectly on newer Pixels!
Yeah, google likes to erase speech too. Imagine that
@@OperatorPuski Bruh.
The way Marques explains this is really really good and easy.
You're such a chill, smart, and positive influence. I wish we were friends. Keep up the great work/dedication. You're my go to, baby! Also, PS. Do you know the show on AM radio, The Tech Guy With Leo Laporte? He's you if you were both 30-40 yrs ago. Think you'd love it.
Super informative !!!! Cheers mate
There needs to be an optional setting where you can revert it to the original photo without post-processing that you can use on the normal camera mode. Just in case you need to. Wouldn't hurt anyone, and it'd be great for pro photography. (I know I don't have a checkmark, but pls still heart this, man)
it's there on pixel 6 and iphone 13 pro (as far as I know)
basically just turn on RAW mode and they save a RAW photo which is plain as heck for editing and a regular processed photo
@@madness1931 well I use a pixel 6 pro and boy lemme tell ya something about RAW, it's always a dead ass photo with no processing and tons of info
@@akuul15 There kind of nerds to be some processing, on a digital camera. It's unavoidable. Its one of the reasons we also see proprietary takes on RAW formats. These can use different processing formulas, and capture more information, than traditional RAW.
Holy cow - the guy at 6:28 is SO HANDSOME!!!!
Nice work. I just started to profile smartphones recently
I love your videos so much
Wow. These next generation in phone cameras are next level, I still remember when people had to use flip phones and the camera quality was at 144p lol
I'd love to see you do a comparison of phone cameras overlaid on raw images from a DSLR with all settings as closely matched as possible. Great topic BTW.
I love how this guy explains things… i need him as my math teacher now !
Composition and story telling, is the true art of an artist.
I did exactly this after getting my iPhone 13 Pro max from an iPhone X. I wanted to see which camera was which by covering the lens. I was really confused that covering the main camera would block the 3X image. Now this makes a lot of sense. I seem to recall that iPhone wanted to do auto macro too. I'm fine with computational photography, but at least give users the option to disable it.
I think you mentioned a good phrase: they are "capturing a moment", they are not capturing a photograph. Most people are not photographers, artists, or scientists. They just want documentation of their -perception- of the world. And in doing that, the smartphone camera is succeeding in its mission
You're defeating your own point. These adjustments make a better photo at the cost of being further from the reality of what was actually captured. Therefor, they are not actually documenting a realistic perception of the world, they're documenting a better version of the world that they didn't exactly experience.
@@Sco10 Explain what you mean about us not experiencing an unfiltered reality? You got some 4k distance blur, sepia-tone eyeballs bro?
@@Sco10 Okay, like which techniques? Cuz Vignette must not be what you mean...?
@@Sco10 I can understand group photo corrections or eye adjustments, red eye removal, especially. This is attempting to remove certain limitations inherent to the camera itself. My issue is with embellishments.
Great subject to dive in to!
Congrats on reach 15M🎉✨🎇
While it's impressive that this computational image enhancing works so well, I still hate the idea of phones manipulating photos without people's knowledge. Stuff like this will almost definitely exacerbate problems like phone addiction and people undergoing plastic surgery just to look as "good" as their phones make them look. I'm even gonna go so far as to say that there should be legal restrictions to this type of stuff.
Imagine in the future people will be able to fake situations and commit crimes with this type of technology.
@@JAHistheONE yeah, in a couple of years you won't be able to trust videos anymore because deepfaking has gotten so good that it's indistinguishable from a real recording... scares me tbh^^
@UCW7bZuFjMKJWuxdxLiQa6nA true, but there are still limitations. LTT did a ShortCircuit video a while ago that was hosted by an actor and they tried to deepfake Linus' face and voice into the video. Impressive, but far from indistinguishable. But it's only a matter of time I guess...
I was really hoping you would show more examples of these phones taking “real” pictures vs the ai enhanced ones
Second this, seems like more digging (or even generating some through ps) would significantly help illustrate the point, much more intuitive and straightforward at least.
@@ChiaDai Check his last Sony smartphone review, the one with a crazy camera sensor, i think he describes exactly what that "real" type pictures looks like
I'll try making a video on it
@@HtheKing id watch that
So well thought!
6:50 marques predicting the Pixel 8, wow!
This kind of videos put the channel way above the regular tech YT-er. Keep on making them Marques.
Incredible.
I never thought to experiment by covering one lens over the other to see what does what.
Love your vids, man. Keep up the good work.
Very intelligent examination of where technology is taking ,or canceling ,our creativity. I never really looked at it that way . Thanks.
wow, Just learnt some new stuff from this vid.
Nice one Mentor
Well, the interesting question might be, is this kind of thing detectable. There's an arms race between detecting shopped images using data-analysis, and better methods of doing the shopping in order to prevent detection. Does doing it during the photo taking process provide for a greater ability to hide those modifications from detection?
So, what you're saying is: we need transparency?
Joke aside, I'd argue that having the unvarnished/unmanipulated image/record be retained alongside (or even within) the manipulated result, and that it also be referenced by the manipulated result somehow. Having the ur-image retained and referenced in this way should be a standard, required protocol.
If each frame was serialized with a time stamp this would be a potential way to verify originality, albeit a super data intensive one. Also, if these were automatically signed on a blockchain, we’d have more solid confidence in the data.
@@michaelthibault7930 my s21 already has the option to save a raw image alongside the 'enhanced' image. But I think it's only available in Pro mode.
We need free and open source software (as in free speech) that we have control. If the phone could detect objects and send it to the phone maker, then our privacy is threatened.
@@BrettWrightsPage sounds good, but to have confidence you need validated hardware and validated image pipeline too. digitally signing frames and storing the hash in block chain only can prevent after the fact edits, but can't prevent preprocessing or processing in general. garbage in, garbage out
I’m fine with it as long as I know that is happening and can opt out if I don’t want it in any particular situation. Have the device come with everything turned on for the consumer and the option to turn it off for the power user/prosumer. This is one the things that has always bugged me most about smartphone photography in general, great video.
5:02 Man goes into game character creation like Fallout 4
That option of changing faces was in the Nokia X6, and other Nokia phones, you coul change the face, remove someone in the background, make you appear multiple times in the same photo and other things.
I guess my concern is with forensics. What happens when a case revolves around an image taken with an AI camera phone. And I am sure the same thing will apply to video. If the AI dynamically makes decisions on what to alter and the changes cannot be reliably replicated, how reliable will this kind of evidence be?
I guess that since the original capture has been tempered, it wouldn’t be accepted ? Wasn’t there a case no so long ago about a lawyer trying to prove that the video capture, as it was, and because of computational treatment, couldn’t be considered as « original capture » and should be rejected as evidence ?
@@supertam I hope everyone do the same
I'd love to see a movie or a miniseries about a mistery revolving around this subject
The thing is we never really know what is "really" happening. Our brain already does a lot of this kind of processing, so who says that one shot is more true to life than another? I actually think cameras that just gather light and record it are less true to life. I remember when I was first doing photography in high school on a K1000 and my photos never looked how I saw them. I realized at some point that higher dynamic range, pupil dilation, stitching in-focus and out-of-focus areas together, colour correction, etc. were all happening in your brain. It gets even weirder when you take temporal perception into account. I think one of human's biggest conceits is that we know what "reality" is. I think deep down we know this is a conceit and that's why we get so sensitive when our notion of reality is challenged. You might think of some scientific reality, where we are keeping a photon record within a certain frequency range, but photos will never display this very well. A photo and our viewing of it will always be a projection of some higher fidelity data source onto our subjective experience. Think of that blue/gold dress phenomenon. That was a photo. The manipulations don't end after a final image has been produced.
I still want a camera that give me the most accurate version of what's going on, not one that gives me what the company thinks I might like. If it has options for editing, cool, but there should still be a RAW option as the main thing.
@@jobansand you missed the point of what I was saying. There is no accurate version. It's inherently subjective.
what does biology about this
Super interesting as always. The answer is: I am okay with it so long as it gives me the option as to whether to actually do it or not. And preferably it will show me it both ways.
Great vid! I'm just thankful for the Sony Pro-I.
This is a great synopsis of the state of modern computational photography on photography as an art form. Basically feels like we need to pick up our cameras and edit our own reality rather than keep collecting images of a world that never was. Thank you 🙏🏼
MKBHD doesn’t need the dislike count because we all know it’s going to a 99% like ratio. Quality, thought-provoking content as always 👍
According to that one plugin which will only work for the moment, it is 45k:512
526 Dislikes rn 11:24 UTC +1
eyy
just wanted to throw in: there's now a browser extension that shows the dislike count again. it's using the youtube api which is still giving the information, for how long, nobody knows. it seems trustworthy, from what i've heard. it seems to work mostly. "Return TH-cam Dislike"
@@CodepageNet Yeah I have it and it works fine. Like rn I know this video has 616 dislikes
Photographs are meant to capture a moment, an experience. Even an "untimely" blinking of an eye is what makes that moment unique in our lives. Altering that to fit what we think is perfect or what is socially acceptable is a dangerously slippery slope. We all tried to edit some photo we captured once in our lives but what really gives pause for thought is do we edit the photos because we think it looks better or do we edit the photos because we think other people will think it looks better? We sometimes forget that we usually see ourselves as a still photograph but everyone around us see a living moving face with all its quirks and blemishes. Makes me think that we don't even know ourselves sometimes. Learn to accept yourself a little more everyday.
Great explanation love Your video❣️