Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Monday June 17 2019, @03:41PM   Printer-friendly
from the AI-can-tell-by-some-of-the-pixels-and-from-seeing-quite-a-few-shops-in-my-time dept.

This AI Can Tell When Faces in Photos Were Photoshopped

Fake photos are a rampant issue in our digital age, but researchers are working hard to restore a greater degree of trust to photography. One team has created a new AI that can detect when faces in photos were manipulated using Photoshop.

The researchers at Adobe and UC Berkeley have published their work in a new paper titled, "Detecting Photoshopped Faces by Scripting Photoshop," explaining how the new method can figure out if Photoshop's Face Aware Liquify feature was used.

[...] While humans were only able to detect the edited faces 53% of the time, the AI managed to correctly catch 99% of them. What's even more impressive is that in addition to figuring out whether and where a photo was manipulated, the AI could also undo those edits and bring that photo back toward its original state.

Also at Adobe Blog and DIYPhotography.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Luke on Monday June 17 2019, @10:27PM

    by Luke (175) on Monday June 17 2019, @10:27PM (#856817)

    Eh? Don't you mean GIMP!

    Actually it _may_ make a difference, from what I read in the paper .

    As far as I could tell the only tool they used to generate the test 'fakes' was Photoshop. Although I've no specific knowledge of Photoshop I expect it will have its own particular way of doing things that in itself may generate a 'marker' that could identify changes, given enough comparative data.

    The paper discusses 'pixel-wise reconstruction loss', 'resizing methods (bicubic and bilinear), JPEG compression, brightness, contrast, and saturation' as some indicators. At a high level I would have thought other editing tools may mange things a little differently and so thus could reduce the accuracy of the process at this stage.

    However I'd imagine that in the future any such potential inaccuracies would reduce as the dataset was increased and the process refined - much like facial recognition processes have improved since the '60's - although it still has a long way to go , as does voice recognition it would appear.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3