BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: New Questions

Photography Question 
Josh Henderson 
BetterPhoto Member Since: 3/30/2007
 

face recognition software


Has anyone had good results with this. I heard alot of the newer cameras are coming out with it.


To love this question, log in above
4/1/2007 12:22:14 PM

 
Ariel Lepor
BetterPhoto Member Since: 9/8/2005
  I heard about the fujifilms with this ability, but I don't know how good or bad it is. I don't see a need for it, anyhow.


To love this comment, log in above
4/1/2007 5:04:49 PM

 
W.   
"I don't see a need for it, anyhow."

I concur with Ariel.
I think I can recognize a face when I see one in the viewfinder. I don't see a point to a camera doing that for me!
Or are we on the road to photographerless photography?


To love this comment, log in above
4/1/2007 7:28:17 PM

 
Ariel Lepor
BetterPhoto Member Since: 9/8/2005
  Photographerless photography. That would be an interesting future! Although it is really not needed, it can be used for P&S photographers who want the faces to be in focus, I guess.


To love this comment, log in above
4/1/2007 7:36:23 PM

 
Samuel Smith
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/21/2004
  well,well,well.by reading thru the threads in the last year or so many members feel it's useless to list settings because photo programs with their post processing changes render them useless.
but to attack a new technilogical breakthrough as photographerless photography,isn't that digital?
the big discussion is that if you shoot raw you have more latitude and fixing things is so much easier.
so is it p&s or ps.
ok,lets do away with evaulative metering,sensor focus points and only use spot focus.oops,no need for spot focus either I guess.
so it's ok to change skin tones,add color,mask out imperfections,but nothing new is allowed?bravo.
I remember a face,it's the name I have trouble with anymore.
sam


To love this comment, log in above
4/1/2007 8:17:01 PM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  Mr. Leghorn, digital has a latitude similar to the exposure latitude of slide film. Contrary to what people think, being off with digital, despite it being done in raw file, you don't have much room to lighten or darken before it shows in the picture that it wasn't done right to begin with.
Negative film on the other hand, has such a extremely wide comparable latitude(especially in over exp. and also in printing) that that is where you find all that room for fixing and lack of knowledge still resulting in a usable picture.
But this face recognition is probably something for the auto focus users and poor framing people. Camera picks the auto focus point where the face is so even if it's lots of wall above the head that you frame, the focus point that's over the face is what gets selected.


Good day Mr. Leghorn


To love this comment, log in above
4/1/2007 11:09:50 PM

 
Andy 
BetterPhoto Member Since: 5/28/2002
  I was laughing when I heard about that feature until I saw what it can be done to the all-automatic-point-and-shooters (for example, my wife). She already owned a Canon PowerShot S60 (that you can select focusing point in creative mode) and had difficulty focusing in all-automatic mode (that's the only mode my wife used). It always focus on the wrong subject. One day she heard about it from a friend and she wanted a better p&s camera. So I bought her the newer Canon PowerShot SD 800 IS (more automatic and less manual control) with the Digic III chip. I swear that the face detection works V E R Y well and I look focus in the picture rather than the background, LOL. You can turn off that feature if you don't want it.


To love this comment, log in above
4/2/2007 8:00:37 AM

 
W.   
Andy, thanks for confirming by your example that 'face recognition' is effectively indeed intended for photographerless photography. Literally!
Because you can't really call point & shooters 'photographers', can you?


To love this comment, log in above
4/2/2007 8:36:28 AM

 
Andy 
BetterPhoto Member Since: 5/28/2002
  I cannot say point & shooters are photographers and I CANNOT say point & shooters are NOT photographers. W H O can define what photographers are or are not. You?


To love this comment, log in above
4/2/2007 8:48:22 AM

 
W.   
"I cannot say point & shooters are photographers"

Exactly.


To love this comment, log in above
4/2/2007 9:01:56 AM

 
Andy 
BetterPhoto Member Since: 5/28/2002
  I also said "I CANNOT say point & shooters are NOT photographers".

I wouldn't say that 'face recognition is effectively indeed intended for photographerless photography'. If you don't need that feature, you don't have to use it. Someone still need to hold the camera and point to something.

I just wanted to tell Josh that the face detection indeed works (most of the time).


To love this comment, log in above
4/2/2007 10:00:28 AM

 
Ariel Lepor
BetterPhoto Member Since: 9/8/2005
  LOL

"Photographer" means "one who draws with light."

Pushing a button without telling the camera anything is still photography, just not professional photography.


To love this comment, log in above
4/2/2007 12:20:24 PM

 
Samuel Smith
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/21/2004
  hey pepi,
gee I got to laughing so haard when I saw the post.it's not mister.foghorn,leghorn,stupid.brainless.fits me much better.
am I a fanatic of digital?no.so is digital being usurped by a simple auto program that recognizes the intent of the photographer?in auto and requires no knowledge?hilarious.
might be a threat to those who think their knowledge is the utmost.quite the hoot folks.
I am laughing so hard ,that maybe a bunch/group/cliques,can load up the bus.
mr.leghorn,ah the chuckles.
how can I possibly go out and shoot this stupid 400 speed generic film and entertain myself?say that cvs 1 hour ain't that bad?
I captured what I wanted.
I agree with being personable,and boy I sure miss that mark some times.
just trying to entertain slick,sam


To love this comment, log in above
4/2/2007 8:20:47 PM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  There's a guy who shoots the sports illustrated swimsuit issue with a point and shoot camera.


To love this comment, log in above
4/2/2007 9:59:30 PM

 
Christopher A. Vedros
BetterPhoto Member Since: 3/14/2005
  "There's a guy who shoots the sports illustrated swimsuit issue with a point and shoot camera."

I just thought of several funny but inappropriate responses to that one! ;-)


As for the face-recognition feature, I think technological advances are great, as long as we can still choose whether or not we want to use them. If a camera had that feature but it couldn't be turned off, then I wouldn't recommend it - otherwise, what's wrong with it? Wailing and moaning about how technical advances are a bad thing just makes a person look like a technophobe, an elitist, or an old-timer. Or Sam. ;-)

And just so Sam doesn't think I'm only picking on him . . .

Hey W.Smith - You've been posting quite a bit of self-righteous attitude around here lately. People are just looking for answers. Considering you have one photo in your gallery, shot with a point & shoot by the way, maybe a little tolerance might be in order?

Chris A. Vedros
www.cavphotos.com


To love this comment, log in above
4/3/2007 6:32:48 AM

 
Samuel Smith
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/21/2004
  pick on me all you want chris.
i'm not the only one who thinks someone is a pompous something or other?
i'll try to be careful with my wording.
funny,inapproiate.boy did I let one fly a while back.
I am an old timer.of course that entails values and truth.but of course that could also include old-timers disease.altzheimers.sp.
oh I have wailed,guess I should give a note to the heads up.
but a bit of humility can only be appreciated by,boy,an open mind.
I gues we'll see,sam


To love this comment, log in above
4/3/2007 8:18:46 PM

 
Log in to respond or ask your own question.