Apologies for the long-winded title on this one – it’s a really good one ~!

What is it?

A research paper has been released by researchers at Brown University detailing an algorithm they have created which allows users to navigate collections of outdoor images on the basis of a set of “transient attributes”. These attributes include the time of day (morning, night, dawn dusk and so on), the season (spring, summer, autumn, winter) and even the prevailing weather conditions (more sunny, rainy, snowy and so on).

In addition to these variables which affect scenery in reality – users are also able to interact on the basis of subjective attributes (e.g. “stressful, boring”). These conditions have been developed through an experimental activity where respondents were asked to rate a series of images for these variables.

By comparing responses from participants to the varying attributes with the image, the algorithm has become able to not only provide users of the program with alternative images when commanded (i.e. to present a different image that is “more cold”) but remarkably, the algorithm is also able to able to automatically enact image processing upon an image – presenting the user instantly with a modified  image.

For more detailed information on the work, please refer to the video below, as well as the research paper which can be read here.

Why is it important?

The reaction to this innovation in photographic circles (or at least the comment section of PetaPixel, where I first heard about it) is relatively lukewarm. The main criticism seems to be that (as demonstrated) the changes enacted by the algorithm are poor in comparison to what can be achieve through alterations on Photoshop.

In all due respect however, this position does not really grasp what is significant about this research, and at the very least comes from a privileged position (namely the position of photographic enthusiasts and professionals who have both the time and the expertise to make significant amendments to images). [From this point forward I will be discussing the possible use of this technology within consumer imaging.]

As a consumer product (e.g if applied to Instagram) the potential offered by this technology are compelling for a number of reasons. To begin consumers enjoy the ability to edit their images today using filters. This algorithm (and others like it) would allow them a new set of tools to push the capabilities of image-editing/correction even further. Importantly this would further remove the requirement for both user expertise and time in users achieving more ambitious imaging goals. Theoretically this would result in more pleasing images for the user with the same amount of “friction” in their process of creation and sharing. I will explain what I mean by these two things a bit more in the following section.

How might it affect the Social Camera?

Editing and Authenticity

As previously mentioned, the ability to edit images has been seen to be quite important to smartphone imaging. Filters as a form of easy editing can be seen as one of the primary reasons behind the success of Instagram. This is possibly a result of the Instagram filter’s ability to negate some of the weaknesses of early smartphone photography by emulating film photography. We could argue that this offers some very real benefits (getting rid of digital artefacts/ normalizing an image) as well as symbolic and value-driven ones (more “real” or “substantial” as it looks feels/like a Polaroid etc. etc.)

We might also  argue that this possible skeaumorphic value to the Instagram filter doesn’t exist any more as it has become a cultural institution in its own right (so people no longer associate them with film and its processes but rather its own culture).

In addition to this, filters are no longer one-size-fits-all, with users able to edit images with granular control –  and now users have more powerful cameras and got over an initial learning curve – the culture is more inclined to use more sophisticated tools on the platform. This has something to do with the life-cycle of a unique product which we won’t get into too much right now… 

Despite this – people’s tolerance to image editing at the consumer level is fairly high. This might mean that an image editor that could seamlessly change your images to be “more moody” or “rainy” might be of interest to users. However what this technology proposes which might be challenging to users is single touch image editing which profoundly changes the “truth” of the image. This is somewhat unprecedented (at least in a way that is as sophisticated as demonstated here).

Here’s the tricky bit. Where previously an Instagram filter had the effect of changing the digital image into one that resembled a film image or process (perhaps changing how we view the image), if applied to Instagram this algorithm does not change the material nature/ format of image, but the image content. This is important, as whilst possible, it has never been this easy to change night to day, or summer to winter.

Whilst the magnitude of the physical change to the image is more or less identical to an Instagram filter (changing an equivalent amount of the colours) the affective change is more pronounced as it changes the truth of the content of the image (as opposed to looking like a more iconic format.).

Changing an image shot during the day to one that appears to have been taken at night (or warmer / colder than it was) is something that we would imagine goes against the principles of photography. It remains to be seen how and if this technology or some like it would be applied to (and received in) the consumer space. However it does push forward the notion that photography and reality are not mutually exclusive for reasons that will be explained next…

The Importance of the Process (or Lack Thereof)

Process is very important to photography. The historic chemical process of creating an image (the transference of light information to a surface which lasts indefinitely). We might argue that because it was very time consuming and difficult to change a film image dramatically; this is why photographic images have been seen as truer representations of something that happened than any type of representation we had available to us previously. (Although chemical photography – as with all types – was not without its dupes and fakes, Stalin’s historical revisionism is a prime example of this)

We could again argue this is why when digital photography (and PhotoShop) allowed much more ground for people to bend the intrinsic truth with an image – that there was some furore in academic circles with some even mourning the death of photography. The innovation discussed in this blog post is another such advancement that could allow people to edit the “truth” of an image with even less requirement for expertise or time.

What is critical here is not the death of photographic truth (as we said before Stalin was perfectly able to “delete” people who existed in a moment from images). But rather the requirement to understand the photograph not as a truth on its own. Instead the photography is the culmination of a process completed by the photographer which can be completed for accuracy, but is also becoming increasingly malleable to more and more people.

What is most interesting to me is how we “factor in” the process of creating and sharing a photograph today into our comprehension of what photographic images are, and the values they represent. Simply because, a photograph no longer represents the values instilled by 100 years of the same photochemical process (and practices and expertise). In fact photographic processes are becoming increasingly diverse, and are continually evolving.  The next generation will realise this before we do, and we might predict that they will not be as influenced by “old photography” as we are. Instead more “native” to the meanings and values ascribed to the new practices and processes they are involved in today.

In essence this is what my research aims to scratch the surface of –  at least the influence of social sharing on our understanding of smartphone photography …

Regardless, the impact upon photography is profound and its happening now.

—

What do you think though? Leave a comment or start a conversation with me on Twitter at @mdhendry