You’re not wrong. But that’s done by inferring what should be there. So it’s still going to appear to be faked, because in a very real sense it is faked. It’s faked within a narrow band of expectations, but it is faked. A better way to send out photos like this is to include the original and the enhanced version in the publication. To remove doubt
True. Upscaling is likely to always trigger a positive with any AI analysis tool, unless it has been calibrated to detect upscaling; including probably some reference to, or pre-processing of, the original image.
So yes… Honestly, including a visible disclaimer, and providing a reference to the original, should be a requirement for ANY digital image adjustment, in ANY work of non-fiction; including adjustments made in photoshop, like making a model skinnier or removing stretch marks. You shouldn’t be able to misrepresent reality to consumers without explicitly telling them it’s a misrepresentation.
You’re not wrong. But that’s done by inferring what should be there. So it’s still going to appear to be faked, because in a very real sense it is faked. It’s faked within a narrow band of expectations, but it is faked. A better way to send out photos like this is to include the original and the enhanced version in the publication. To remove doubt
True. Upscaling is likely to always trigger a positive with any AI analysis tool, unless it has been calibrated to detect upscaling; including probably some reference to, or pre-processing of, the original image.
So yes… Honestly, including a visible disclaimer, and providing a reference to the original, should be a requirement for ANY digital image adjustment, in ANY work of non-fiction; including adjustments made in photoshop, like making a model skinnier or removing stretch marks. You shouldn’t be able to misrepresent reality to consumers without explicitly telling them it’s a misrepresentation.