| | | Good morning! At what point do all sorts of upscaling, AI, image engine functions, algorithms, and enhancements in phone cameras, saunter into the realm of being absolutely and undeniably “fake”? There must be a line in the sand, isn’t it? There is the usual suspect, Samsung, which is in the middle of another photography controversy. This time, with the much-touted Galaxy S23 Ultra smartphone. This Reddit user (read the test in detail, it is intriguing) did a very simple test to see how the Rs 1,24,999 “ultra” phone deals with a really blurred moon (this low-quality image was on purpose) in its field of vision. Turns out, it created an all-new moon, with details that it never saw. This is not enhancement. What the phone has created here isn’t a real photograph. It is digital imaging. Incredibly disappointing, for people who’ve spent all that money.  Image credit: u/ibreakphotos on Reddit Questions will obviously be asked from Samsung. After all, they’ve specifically talked about “astrophoto” capabilities in publicity material for this phone which leads with a 200-megapixel camera. “Set exposure manually or let the camera choose, then point it skyward to capture planets and constellations with clarity,” is how it reads on their website. This Samsung video (at around 12 seconds in), shows off moon photography muscles. But what would you describe as fake? There is absolutely no doubt that computational photography, algorithms, and physical sensors are at their most capable now than they’ve ever been and will only take a few steps forward every year. You can always argue about the fact that photo editing options are available. And you can play around with all sorts of filters. That as a step, is optional, only to be invoked manually by the user. It shouldn’t be Samsung’s choice to put a new and incredibly detailed moon when it’s real sight of the moon is undeniably fuzzy at best. Edited photos aren’t fake. Adding details, without disclosure, is. I’d have (partly) accepted the powerful AI argument if the image of the moon which Samsung worked on, had some sort of actual detailing of a moon. The test image is at best, a fuzzy compilation of pixels. Some of the texture and craters Samsung has added where none are visible in the original. It is pre-emptive photography processing, at its best. In my opinion, adding detail that simply isn’t present in the actual scenario, tantamount to the result being fake. It is as simple as that. Smart image processing and upscaling techniques improve details that are genuinely visible. In this case, what the camera sensor sees and therefore received as data. Not add, when there are none. That should brief given to image processing. I’ve said it before. Samsung never bothered to share the Galaxy S23 Ultra with me, for review. There is no way for me to disprove or make more sense of this test and its results. There may be another side of this proverbial coin. If at all these results could be debunked. But then again, history isn’t on Samsung’s side. The comments on that Reddit thread have users sharing experiences (and images clicked) of moon photography with other phones including the Google Pixel 7 Pro. None add the level of artificial details that the Galaxy S23 Ultra does.  | | It isn’t the first time Samsung has been caught faking the moon. They’d been at the receiving end of questions with the Galaxy S21 Ultra as well (you must read this Input story), with unnatural levels of detailing. That was 2021. | | | | Samsung’s clarification (via this blog post then, with Google Translate thrown in for good measure) used every argument possible – AI, deep learning models, Super Resolution technology etc. Would you have expected anything less? | | | | The line that stood out for me, is this – “the Galaxy Camera applies a deep learning-based AI Detail Enhancement engine (Detail Enhancement technology) in its final stages to effectively eliminate noise and make the most of the moon’s detail to complete a bright, clear moon photo.” What does it even mean? | | | | The problem with what Samsung has done (again!) is given you an artificially generated image, not a photo. Once you come to terms with the difference between sourcing an image and a photo, you can then argue about data sets and deep learning. And you’ll have your answer. | | | | People are now more aware of potentially AI infused fake images, masquerading as real ones. Samsung’s treatment of the moon is an example. | Here is what you need to consider. First, why would you want to spend Rs 1,24,999 on the Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra? There are better choices, that cost much lesser – the OnePlus 11 and the Xiaomi 13 Pro are proof. And neither have been seen (or caught) faking images. At least not thus far. Secondly, we have text-to-image artificial intelligence tools available, quite readily. We’ll simply create an artificially generated image of the moon from there. Isn’t it? What good is a smartphone camera lying to us? For me, no matter what AI or image smarts come along, the definition of a real photo won’t change. It may, for you. | | CHANGE It is time for Android to change, as the clock keeps ticking. It wouldn’t change in terms of how you use it, but significant alterations in how it is packaged for device makers. As well as the level of flexibility and level playing field opportunities third-party app developers get. You may certainly notice at some stage, that the next line of Android phones (at least that’s the hope) may arrive in your welcoming hands with lesser number of Google apps preloaded. This should, in theory, open doors for alternate apps to be discovered. And used. Read: Google looks to Android’s future, with a wary eye on the past It wasn’t exactly a surprise when Google claimed that unbundling Android will lead to a higher cost of accessing Android for device makers (they basically followed the model of pre-load all our apps and Android is free for you to use), which will in turn mean phones will become more expensive. But as I’ve pointed out, phone prices have already been on an upward trend in the last 24 months. Nothing to do with what’s yet to happen. The unmissable argument which kept filtering through from app developers – they didn’t stand a chance. That should change now. Look at it this way. If your next Android phone doesn’t have a preloaded Gmail or Chrome or Search app for instance, you’ll go looking for one. On the Play Store or do a quick search online. Maybe ask your friends. Chances of stumbling on an as capable (or even more feature rich) alternative, are quite high. But if a phone already has every basic app you need preloaded (and made by Google, mind you), why would most users even bother to look for another app? What worries me is the potential return of fragmentation. With all changes inbound, some devices that fork away significantly while retaining the Android core, may be left out of the loop for security updates and regular upgrades. The result could be something very common in the year 2015 – lots of devices running old Android versions, with no updates in sight. They won’t just be left behind just on the version number, but also newer security and privacy patches. Which may prove their worth at some stage. | | | | DRAMA | | Elon Musk gets into a Twitter conversation with a differently-abled Twitter employee. Nothing to see here. | | | | Elon Musk said Twitter was done with firing the workforce. Turns out, that isn’t true. Now he’s up and about letting go of the best employees. Is this man for real? | | | UPDATE It’s finally here. Google is rolling out the stable version of what is the first Feature Drop of 2023, for Pixel phones. That is, the Pixel 4 onwards, right up to the latest Pixel 7 and Pixel 7 Pro, but perplexingly missing the Pixel 6 series for now. There are a bunch of new things – faster Night Sight camera mode, Magic Eraser for Photos, Health Connect, synced timers and some region-specific features. My attention has solely been on the progress of this update from the beta stages over the last two months, just for 5G. It is high time too. Google has made an absolute mess of it. There is no other way of summarising it. By early January, phone makers (be it the Android ecosystem or Apple) had pieced together software updates to enable 5G for Airtel and Reliance Jio. Some took longer, often a factor of how wide the portfolio awaiting updates. But it was done. By everyone except Google. These Pixel phones, which are supposed to be the torchbearers of the greatness of Android, have been the last to get 5G. The first target was the December update, we were told. Then it was pushed to first quarter for 2023. And here we are, at the outer edge of this deadline. Even as the Feature Drop officially rolled out late evening Monday this week, there was no sign of it on our Pixel 7 series phones till the next morning either. Google’s default guidance is a window of a week. It’ll eventually arrive in a few days, for sure. This is where I must say this – when Android phone makers aspire to be like Apple, they need to pay more attention to finer details. Think about it – any iOS update is made available for all compatible iPhones, anywhere in the world, within a few minutes of the green light. And there are certainly more of those, than Pixel phones. But well…better late than never? | | COURSE-CORRECTION?
| | Meta says (and this is how they describe it) they’ll be “winding down” support for NFTs on Facebook and Instagram. Just about a year after the big money push into digital collectibles. This is perplexing, because Mark Zuckerberg had suggested last year at SXSW that NFTs will play a big role in the company’s metaverse push. Which itself, even now, is anyone’s guess. The fact they are considering making a Twitter rival underlines the realisation they need to get back to the basics. | | | Spotify, on the other hand, wants to try something different. You’ll notice the interface change at some point in the next few weeks. Weirdly, emphasis is on vertical interface, with an attempt at making your music and podcast discovery look more like you’re browsing Instagram. We’ll have to see how this goes, but I’m not getting my hopes up. But that is how I am, most of the time. | | | | | Were you forwarded this email? Did you stumble upon it online? Sign up here. | | Written and edited by Vishal Shanker Mathur. Produced by Md Shad Hasnain. | | | | | | | Get the Hindustan Times app and read premium stories | | | | | | View in Browser | Privacy Policy | Contact us You received this email because you signed up for HT Newsletters or because it is included in your subscription. Copyright © HT Digital Streams. All Rights Reserved | | | | |
