Detecting Faked Photographs Gets Easier 258
nusratt writes "Some years ago, an issue of 'Whole Earth' had a convincing cover-photo of a flying saucer cruising low over downtown San Francisco in broad daylight. The accompanying feature article proclaimed that photographs can no longer be trusted as evidence of anything, because of the ease of doctoring images digitally and undetectably. Now, Dartmouth Professor Hany Farid and graduate student Alin Popescu 'have developed a mathematical technique to tell the difference between a "real" image and one that's been fiddled with.' Farid says, 'as more authentication tools are developed it will become increasingly more difficult to create convincing digital forgeries'." There's also an NYT story.
So much for my faked photo of Rumsfeld & Sadda (Score:5, Funny)
Rumsfeld was really shaking hands with an alien, and Saddam was shaking hands with Elvis, but the resulting merger of the two photos was much more provocative.
I had developed a foolproof algorithm... (Score:3, Funny)
practical use (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So much for my faked photo of Rumsfeld & Sa (Score:1, Funny)
Now my picutes with girls wont cause so much envy in my geek friends...
Bye Angelia Jolie...
Bye Liv Tyler...
Bye, bye..
I like you them all.
Shame on you, heart-breaking algorithms!
Re:Self Defeating (Score:3, Funny)
don't believe the parent post since... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What kind of digitized photos does this work on (Score:3, Funny)
The whole thing's a fraud... (Score:2, Funny)
C'mon now. math geek... handsome... math geek... handsome...
Sorry, I'm not buyin' it.