Another related thing to consider, if she had plastic surgery what are the odds that among a billion people there isn’t someone whose face looks more like her original face than her face looks like her original face.
In street photography, and any photography really, paying attention to light is super important. I’d argue it’s more important when you can’t control it.
Sure you could just go out onto the street, take a bunch of photos and pay no attention to light, but if you want to improve your photos, or know why good photos are good, paying attention to light is just as important as say composition
I'm not saying knowledge of lighting is unimportant. I'm saying knowledge of studio lighting is of little use when you don't have control over things like the type of lighting (daylight vs. incandescent vs. fluorescent, etc.) and lighting placement because you're shooting outdoors and you're limited largely to natural lighting (perhaps with the exception of a flash), and no ability to bounce lighting.
Alright here’s my counter point. The useful range (min focal length to max focal length) of most zooms is small enough that if you have a high end sensor and you’re not doing large prints you might as well use a prime. It’s like you don’t need those intermediate steps.
With zooms, if you need wide angle you have to switch to a wide angle zoom, if you need telephoto you need to switch to that. There are some exceptions like zooms that cover ~35-140 but most of them fall into one of the categories that a prime falls into
I used to think like you but lately I just can’t be bothered with editing too much and with the raw workflow so I mostly shoot in JPG these days. I shoot in raw when I’m shooting in situations where the lighting is difficult.
Probably hard to make a general statement. Lightroom is better these days at making automagical editing decisions. And I like heavily culling photos and adding at least some metadata (although with shooting most of my current photos on an iPhone which adds GPS it's less of a big deal). However, JPG on that iPhone is also pretty good. Not a big deal one way or the other. I just bias to not throwing away data rather than not having it or having to make real-time decisions about how much data to collect.
Yeah that’s a good point about the real-time decisions. I’ve been thinking about it since my comment and I think I’ll give raw another shot. It has such a wider dynamic range* than jpg and maybe it’s a way to almost future proof your photos.
*jpg photos in sRGB
Also bit depth difference is huge
To be fair advertising without collecting sensitive data does exist. I think the collection of sensitive data is a more serious issue so let’s not say all ads are abusive in that way.
However, I agree with the position that all ads with some small exceptions are a negative thing. I think the incentives behind advertising are inherently perverse because of what they are at their core, an attempt to manipulate (if they work then a successful attempt!). They are dishonest and inauthentic by design. It’s possible to create an ad that is like “hey this thing exists and this is strictly what it does without any exaggeration” but that basically never happens because the people who make ads have no external incentive to do that.
I think a much more ideal situation is where a user searches for something on a search engine, or an LLM or whatever, and they are shown as unbiased as possible results. This way the people making good products get their exposure and the people looking stuff get the stuff they want. Of course there’s a lot of problems in practice with that as well.
I don’t claim to have a solution, and I don’t think making an add is like super immoral, but I think ads are a scourge on our society and culture.
Yes, I agree, and I also don't think that ads in printed newspapers and magazines are a problem, for example.
If I were to propose a general law to regulate advertisements, then it would be that if you serve content that qualifies as being an advertisement to a user, then the choice of advertisement must be independent of any data about that user. This includes the username and any details the user has entered or which has been collected as the user has been using the service, and also any ephemeral data associated with the session such as IP address. That is, the choice of ad is completely parametric in the user; if two users request the content from different locations, then they should in principle be served the same ad (ignoring other state such as ad impression counters which would still be allowed).
This would probably not be good for the ad-tech industry but I think it could remove many of the perverse incentives leading to excessive data collection.
I can’t speak for other markets but in Australia millennials are really into Japanese cars, 4X4 or our domestic cars. And the zoomers seem to be into 4x4 as well.
I would argue modified cars are more common than ever in Australia, it’s just not what you’d expect when someone says modified cars, it’s 90% large SUVs and other 4x4 vehicles.
While that is nice, I would love to see the combined image with the uv image colour shifted to blue or magenta. Almost as if we could see UV with our eyes
That might be cool, although those colours might clash with the orange sun. You should try it.
I did another image, this time I took a section near the edge, flattened it to make an horizon, changed colours & contrast until it resembles ocean waves. https://imgur.com/a/5wnJUiN
>If indeed it's happening, the only explanation can be something to do with very deep Quantum Mechanics including multiverse theory
Why would that be the only explanation? that seems like very low down on a long list of possible explanations.
I didn’t read the paper but the author was discussing how some people impart precession onto the coin which is a likely explanation for causing a bias.
Now that so many physicists and legitimate experts (non-quacks) believe in Simulation Theory, we've sort of "merged" physics and Religion. The general agreed upon definition of God is "whatever thing is simulating the universe". Of course all the Religious dogma and mythology stories are things that most of them don't believe.
The fact that some people cause it and some people don't (the coin flip bias) can have an explanation something like having to do with their impact on the causality chain if our universe/timeline. It could be anything from which one of them is older, to which one of them has a future offspring that does something big that has a big impact on the universe (in terms of Butterfly Effect kind of knock-on effects).
But I just don't see a person being able to flip accurately enough cause this. No way. But I'm just playing along here. I don't truly believe this experiment is anything but either a hoax, or mistake.
Well after looking at the map and finding a potential house then you need to read the description…
Idk what it’s like these days but it used to be that looking at the map only or using the filters isn’t anywhere near enough because there’s plenty of “mistakes” that happen to benefit the listed property and bypasses your filter. Like listing a property as the wrong type, or listing a room for rent under houses for rent, etc.
A house purchase is a massive decision, why wouldn’t you read everything and anything you can find about the house, what are you even talking about lol
Specifically for this reason. The seller has much more incentive to provide false information than Google maps.
Before comprehensive maps, street view, high definition video and pictures, etc, one might have had to read what a seller or their agent says.
But now, I might only read a description after a given property meets my location/size/age/etc criteria, but I assume I need to verify whatever information the seller is providing.
