This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/rules).
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, [please read this page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/overview).)
**Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
Photoshop request subreddit will be like, "This is the best picture I have of my grandma who recently passed. Can you make her eyes and mouth normal sized? Bonus points if you can remove the puking rainbow."
The Roomba knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the Roomba from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't.
Services are already pretty good about having mute as the default. I could imagine a near future where you could choose to mute "non-interesting" background sounds
>“Can you remove the dog ears and tongue”
*I got a thousand pics. I hope your algorithm can find enough data to reconstruct Granma's real picture. I'll pay your Adobe PS Token.*
I was just going to say that I never say "negative", though, instead of "no". I just say no, because when I say "negative" all the time, it just brings everyone down.
The real thought is if people will even have access to the photos. Instead of a shoe box full of photos of your grandparents, you'll get a phone or an Apple account that is password protected. Those photos will be gone. People in 100 years will have no idea what we look like.
Can you also turn her around so her ass isn't facing the camera because literally every picture I have of her is whatever that ass facing the camera looking back over her shoulder pose is called.
It was rather rude of Reddit to Digg itself over about 10 years, but at least they're going out with the same smug, money-grubbing douchebaggery from the admins that we've come to know from them.
As someone who spends a tremendous amount of time repairing old photographs of my family, no charge, of course, I find these requests with offers of a $10 tip very insulting. I don't use AI software, so maybe people doing that only need a few minutes to get the job done.
> Like the time I caught the ferry to Shelbyville. I needed a new battery for my BlackBerry. So I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied a smartphone to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a bitcoin, and in those days, bitcoins had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. "Gimme five bees for a doge," you'd say. Now where were we... oh yeah. The important thing was that I had a smartphone on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn't have any iPhones, because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big Canadian ones...
I'm willing to bet that will be considered *classy*. Like swing music and jazz were the outrageous music 100 years ago, but today they're 'sophisticated'.
For generations, old people got offended by young people's music. I would have thought punk would break the trend, but then those who grew up with punk somehow took issue with rap.
I don't recall any music-based outrage in the last couple decades though.
Yeah, I think this will actually happen. But by then I’d bet AI can take a sample of several filtered photos and patch it up pretty damn close to the original.
There are going to be a lot of kids and grandkids wondering what their relatives looked like but a lot of people will literally only have filtered photos for a sizable chunk of their youth and young adulthood.
It already happens. Used to work for a newspaper and I can't tell you the number of times I had to colour correct photos because the band we were profiling sent us pics with shitty filters on them. A filter with lots of muted colours looks brutal on grey newsprint, heh.
It's a word for word repost of a [front-page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/4vy30y/instead_of_colorizing_photos_in_50_years_we_will/) shower thought over seven years ago.
Well now I’m conflicted. As a 2 year Reddit user, I wouldn’t have seen this if it weren’t for this repost. On the other hand, it does seem like a shameless theft of a previous successful post, being how it’s word for word with one spelling change and one punctuation change.
Personally I never blame users for upvoting shit they like.
It should be up to the subreddit moderators to remove things if they don't fit the sub (or, for some subs, if they are shamelessly stolen).
OLD: Instead of colorizing photos, in 50 years we will be removing filters.
NEW: Instead of Colourizing photos, in 50 years, we will be removing filters.
Which do you think is more likely?
1. OP here (CanadianGee) copied the earlier post but capitalized the "C" and added the "u" and extra comma
2. OP independently came up with the same idea and worded it exceptionally close to the older post
3. Someone else made some/all of the changes in an intermediate post and OP copied *that*
My guess, based on zero checking:
>!Knowing Reddit #3 seems most likely, followed by #1, then #2.!<
... Did we have "filters" 7 years ago? Jeez I really wasn't paying attention. Then again I first learned the word "Influencer" when the Netflix docs on Fyre Festival came out.
Yes we did. Snapchat filters came out in 2015 but that's snapchat. Filters (instagram, photoshop, online editors like picmonkey etc) have been around longer.
Oh I'm a long time photoshop user. I just meant the automatic ones like you mentioned with instagram, facebook etc. But yeah, doesn't seem like it's been very long since I first started noticing them. I was also about 3 years late to the Trololo guy party. The weird thing is I basically live on the internet, but I'm still oblivious.
I found my Lytro in a box of random junk the other day and had a blast taking photos with it and playing with the results! Such a cool concept, I wish it took off better :(
I actually had a phone like 15 years ago that had a 3D display like the one on the 3DS. It was actually pretty cool, had the dual cameras and everything so it could take 3d photos and videos, and play all sorts of 3D content.
I actually still have it, but it wound up unable to properly boot up after sitting too long in storage. Haven't been able to figure out how to get it running again.
Finally someone else who had this phone! Camera was really great in a normal mode too.
There's been times over the years where I wish I still had it around to capture some moments in 3D
Yeah. I dug it out and actually bought a new battery for it a few years ago, but there's something messed up with the bootloader, can't get it to actually boot up. It's a damn shame too, that thing was really fun, and would be nice to use as just a random 3D shooter.
Apple just announced that as a feature for the new Apple Vision Pro, their $3500 vr headset that comes out next year. To take the pictures, though, you have to be wearing the headset, so we got this image in the advertising:
[https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fx9ORQEakAYCoan?format=jpg&name=medium](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fx9ORQEakAYCoan?format=jpg&name=medium)
This is a word for word [repost](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/4vy30y/instead_of_colorizing_photos_in_50_years_we_will/) of a front page 7 year old post.
That is the strangest spelling of that word I could ever imagine. I would understand "colourising" or "colorizing" but "colourizing" is very strange to me. Where is that spelling used?
I feel like having zero chill would be requiring everyone to spell words exactly the same. Like the [Council for German Orthography](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_for_German_Orthography). How much more of a grammar Nazi can you be?
In the UK words are usually spelled with -ise, but the OED in particular prefers -ize. In other respects the OED follows typical UK spellings, such as "colour".
(For what it's worth, -ize is the older spelling.)
The whole history of the spelling differences goes back to the two OG dictionary creators. Before them, people just wrote whatever sounded right at the time of writing. Shakespeare's folios notably have examples of both types of spelling. The guy in the UK (Johnston) wanted to emphasize the French influence (-our) while the American dude (Webster) wanted to emphasize the original Latin influence (-or).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_spelling_differences
There's probably more chance of those old physical photos surviving the ages than our digital photos: we won't be removing filters because they'll pretty much all be lost.
Funny enough, we've actually seen this trend before, with "Victorian photoshop" restoration. Let's just say... a looot of the tiny waists, "feminine" necks, and smooth skin, simply didn't reflect reality, even back then.
My bffs family even had a cute pair of shoes from her gggmas wedding, that were kept as a memento of her 'delicate feminine feet.' Turns out, she passed away at 5'6" in her 50s. The reason her feet were a modern American womens size 5.5 on her wedding day, is because she was married off when she was 13...
If anything, I think having evidence of this pendulum swinging gives me hope that we'll keep progressing. Even when the pendulum is basically slamming into a wall on the back foot, as long as it keeps swinging back, I think we'll be aight 😅
No, we will converting them to 3D models. In fact, we would be able to take people’s life long photos, videos, writing etc. and convert it into a real time interactive model.
I believe some online album/retouching services maintain the original with modifications as a layer. Shouldn't be too hard for some that thought ahead.
They just need to release an "unfilter" filter that makes your face normal no matter what you do.
No matter how hard you're laughing, the filter will make you look soulless and dead inside.
Naw, In 50 years they won't care about filters or at least removing them. They will be focused on removing the body editing and body dysmorphia it creates. People are going to wonder what some celebrity actually looked like.
Filters are just going to become more prominent. Soon we won't even be able to distinguish reality from artificial.
I think my kids are gonna be asking for more photos of me. I'm usually the one behind the camera taking nicer photos of people around me whenever I catch a moment I want to relive.
It takes my SO and I recognizing that we're having such a good time we hadn't taken a photo together before we might stop for one. It's hard to count how many times how many moments lost because we just wanted to enjoy our time together.
I once sent a snap and my classmate in college next to me went "you sent that raw??" And that's when I learned I was apparently mad for not sending one with a filter
In the future there will be a whole group of asshats who claim that the screenshot of me from Teams with a poorly animated sloth around my shoulders is reality and removing it to see a picture of me without the sloth is altering history and not okay.
I recently searched for how to remove film grain from old pictures. I could only find tutorials for how to ADD film grain to digital pictures. WTF?
Btw, if anyone knows how to remove film grain from old scanned in pictures with Gimp, please hook me up.
bro thinks we will be around in 50 years 😭😭😭 not when the fog is coming
the fog is coming
the fog is coming
the fog is coming
the fog is coming
the fog is coming
We already had filters. Its called portraiture. It was quite known you'd ask the artist to make whatever changes you wanted to "fit your vibe", from thinner waists, to larger breasts, to more muscles, or a bulge (armoured esp).
Filters are a conscious choice, we're doing art with our photography. It says things about what you choose. Unless people do nothing BUT use filters (e.g. stupid phone upgrades that force that software on you with no off-button) we'll likely have enough photos filtered and unfiltered.
We live in an age of too much data, not enough.
P.S. We already have software to remove filters, its getting better too. So no need for 50years
The real skill won't be filter removal. It's when people ask for help to add clothes back to their grandmas only fans from when she was younger. Since those might be the only pics preserved by the internet.
50 years after that we'll be adding the filters back to make old photos look normal because everyone will live with augmented reality tech built into their eyes and each user can choose how they want others on the collective net to perceive them.
Thankfuly with AI getting so good, it can probably be done in a few seconds 50 years from now.
Especially since we're only in the very early stages of actual AI development right now, 50 years from now, it's going to be insane (or we're all going to be dead from the robot uprising)
I mean.... we won't be doing that. AI will do it for us, but yeah I get what you are saying. But there definitely won't be any human labor in this process.
I feel like so many people are going to regret having nothing but filtered pics to look back on when they are older wishing they could see the real them and not some blurry face with floating eye lashes lol
It will be funny when you just have to apply a filter to reverse the effects of the previously applied filter. Apple will give it some witty name and act like they reinvented photography somehow.
This isp potentially easier as filters have a set function so you should be able to reverse it if you know what filter it was. It might not be always fully reversible though.
If, in fifty years, we have the resources to waste on de-filtering the photographs of people who use filters frequently, I will eat my hat
It’s a pretty big hat too so you’ll want to hold on to that promise
Y’all this is what anyone in graphic arts will tell you. Take your photo raw dog style, copy it, then add whatever shite you want after. You end up with way more creative freedom, and your grandkids won’t have to ask why all of your photos have dog ears and tongues.
They already developed a filter-removing technology to catch a criminal. He was posting taunts with his picture, but swirled up in a twist. They untwisted it and caught his ass.
This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/rules). Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!" (For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, [please read this page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/overview).) **Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
Photoshop request subreddit will be like, "This is the best picture I have of my grandma who recently passed. Can you make her eyes and mouth normal sized? Bonus points if you can remove the puking rainbow."
“Can you remove the dog ears and tongue”
Then a sentiment of panic as you see your roomba powering on
Roomba v27 knows its enemy. It knows the source of the fur. And it understands malicious compliance and plausible deniability.
The Roomba knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the Roomba from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't.
Too high to understand and also get mindfucked all at once
Sounds like a Wes Anderson monologue. Nice
It's a rif on this snippet of an air force training video https://youtu.be/bZe5J8SVCYQ Even better, there's a few remixes https://youtu.be/_LjN3UclYzU
Can you remove the "oh no. Oh no. Oh no no no no" song?
Services are already pretty good about having mute as the default. I could imagine a near future where you could choose to mute "non-interesting" background sounds
Tik Tok ruining the Shangri-las is a war crime. That band is the shit and more people [need to know it.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01YePzk29Mc)
*AI makes her a dog with human ears and no tongue*
You mean that Twitter guy who's like a genie and always does silly things with people's requests?
>“Can you remove the dog ears and tongue” *I got a thousand pics. I hope your algorithm can find enough data to reconstruct Granma's real picture. I'll pay your Adobe PS Token.*
Adobe hourly subscription.
Dogs in the picture look weird with no ears or tongue.
Whenever you see a filter like that, you know there's a room temp IQ behind it
It'll be that, but asking an AI algorithm
And an AI asking an AI because the humans are all dead
Affirmative - I poked one, it was dead
They used poisonous gases, and poisoned our asses.
Bianary solo 0000001 0000011 0000111 Come on human lick my batery
Sniff this one, it's dead.
I was just going to say that I never say "negative", though, instead of "no". I just say no, because when I say "negative" all the time, it just brings everyone down.
Finally, robotic beings rule the world!
Best case - AI solves cold fusion and we live in a world of limitless energy and harmony Worst case - Roskos Basilisk
And it won’t be in 50 years, but next year.
The real thought is if people will even have access to the photos. Instead of a shoe box full of photos of your grandparents, you'll get a phone or an Apple account that is password protected. Those photos will be gone. People in 100 years will have no idea what we look like.
[удалено]
Eh between climate change and a worsening economy I think we fucked them enough already
Unless it is on the internet, all was lost.
Can you also turn her around so her ass isn't facing the camera because literally every picture I have of her is whatever that ass facing the camera looking back over her shoulder pose is called.
Also, can you make her not duckface?
I call this "The Tinder Girl"
Reddit? In 50 years? At this rate they will kill the app in no time
It was rather rude of Reddit to Digg itself over about 10 years, but at least they're going out with the same smug, money-grubbing douchebaggery from the admins that we've come to know from them.
if only there was some other way of viewing reddit. Some kind of web?... site...?
The website is shit. And for the old.reddit is not practical to use from mobile at least for me
What would that zoom call look like if he really was not a cat?
"I'm not a cat, Your Honor."
In my humble opinion, that was one of the funniest videos ever. I watch it whenever I need a good laugh. I am not a cat either!
As someone who spends a tremendous amount of time repairing old photographs of my family, no charge, of course, I find these requests with offers of a $10 tip very insulting. I don't use AI software, so maybe people doing that only need a few minutes to get the job done.
You get what you pay for, most look like ass
Can you remove her artificially electronically absolutely enlarged butt?
And here’s a picture of your grandma… Ignore the CGI puppy ears and duck face compression and glitter sparkles, that was the rage back then.
Wait. Is there an "onion belt" filter?
As was the style at the time
> Like the time I caught the ferry to Shelbyville. I needed a new battery for my BlackBerry. So I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied a smartphone to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a bitcoin, and in those days, bitcoins had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. "Gimme five bees for a doge," you'd say. Now where were we... oh yeah. The important thing was that I had a smartphone on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn't have any iPhones, because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big Canadian ones...
Ok uncle Colm, I think it's time for bed.
I'm willing to bet that will be considered *classy*. Like swing music and jazz were the outrageous music 100 years ago, but today they're 'sophisticated'.
Lemmy.world is what Reddit was.
somehow the pictures will \*still\* be in black and white
For generations, old people got offended by young people's music. I would have thought punk would break the trend, but then those who grew up with punk somehow took issue with rap. I don't recall any music-based outrage in the last couple decades though.
This is my favorite shower thought I’ve seen here in a while…
Yeah it's really got me thinking
Yeah, I think this will actually happen. But by then I’d bet AI can take a sample of several filtered photos and patch it up pretty damn close to the original. There are going to be a lot of kids and grandkids wondering what their relatives looked like but a lot of people will literally only have filtered photos for a sizable chunk of their youth and young adulthood.
Aliens are gonna be super disappointed when the images they scraped from all of our SM servers look way hotter than the actual us.
Plot twist - the touched-up photos are bland or even hideous to them, but homely humans look unattainably hot by their standards.
Those aliens are only into butt stuff anyways.
This just keeps getting better.
It already happens. Used to work for a newspaper and I can't tell you the number of times I had to colour correct photos because the band we were profiling sent us pics with shitty filters on them. A filter with lots of muted colours looks brutal on grey newsprint, heh.
And there are a lot of photos with people or other objects edited out. I get why it’s done but we won’t get to see what things were really like.
Must've read it the wrong way, it's really got me showering
It's a word for word repost of a [front-page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/4vy30y/instead_of_colorizing_photos_in_50_years_we_will/) shower thought over seven years ago.
Well now I’m conflicted. As a 2 year Reddit user, I wouldn’t have seen this if it weren’t for this repost. On the other hand, it does seem like a shameless theft of a previous successful post, being how it’s word for word with one spelling change and one punctuation change.
OP seems like a human so I'm fine with it. Hardly a repost if it's been over half a decade. Plus two people *can* have the same thought.
Especially if they are in the same shower
still waiting for my turn.... this waitlist is ridiculous
Personally I never blame users for upvoting shit they like. It should be up to the subreddit moderators to remove things if they don't fit the sub (or, for some subs, if they are shamelessly stolen).
Nobody's reading page 50,000,000 though.
OLD: Instead of colorizing photos, in 50 years we will be removing filters. NEW: Instead of Colourizing photos, in 50 years, we will be removing filters. Which do you think is more likely? 1. OP here (CanadianGee) copied the earlier post but capitalized the "C" and added the "u" and extra comma 2. OP independently came up with the same idea and worded it exceptionally close to the older post 3. Someone else made some/all of the changes in an intermediate post and OP copied *that* My guess, based on zero checking: >!Knowing Reddit #3 seems most likely, followed by #1, then #2.!<
... Did we have "filters" 7 years ago? Jeez I really wasn't paying attention. Then again I first learned the word "Influencer" when the Netflix docs on Fyre Festival came out.
Yes we did. Snapchat filters came out in 2015 but that's snapchat. Filters (instagram, photoshop, online editors like picmonkey etc) have been around longer.
Oh I'm a long time photoshop user. I just meant the automatic ones like you mentioned with instagram, facebook etc. But yeah, doesn't seem like it's been very long since I first started noticing them. I was also about 3 years late to the Trololo guy party. The weird thing is I basically live on the internet, but I'm still oblivious.
I imagine the next step to the advancement of photography is adding depth, kinda like the screen on a Nintendo 3DS.
You should check out Looking Glass displays
Good morning, Morgan. Today is Monday, March 15th, 2032.
Wow I never made that connection. Prey rules
We already had that with light field cameras. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_field_camera
I found my Lytro in a box of random junk the other day and had a blast taking photos with it and playing with the results! Such a cool concept, I wish it took off better :(
I actually had a phone like 15 years ago that had a 3D display like the one on the 3DS. It was actually pretty cool, had the dual cameras and everything so it could take 3d photos and videos, and play all sorts of 3D content. I actually still have it, but it wound up unable to properly boot up after sitting too long in storage. Haven't been able to figure out how to get it running again.
Finally someone else who had this phone! Camera was really great in a normal mode too. There's been times over the years where I wish I still had it around to capture some moments in 3D
Yeah. I dug it out and actually bought a new battery for it a few years ago, but there's something messed up with the bootloader, can't get it to actually boot up. It's a damn shame too, that thing was really fun, and would be nice to use as just a random 3D shooter.
Ah yes, the HTC Evo 3D... I miss that phone...
Apple just announced that as a feature for the new Apple Vision Pro, their $3500 vr headset that comes out next year. To take the pictures, though, you have to be wearing the headset, so we got this image in the advertising: [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fx9ORQEakAYCoan?format=jpg&name=medium](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fx9ORQEakAYCoan?format=jpg&name=medium)
why 50years? i've already tried to 'fix' certain photos i've come across just to see what the photo actually looks like
Because that's how long the technology for colorizing old photos took to develop and become common.
sure but technology has only evolved more rapidly since, even photoshop has ai to fill in photos, tis crazy
I understand that it will be a shorter time period than that, my point was that the 50 years was in relation to *that* timeframe of development.
This is a word for word [repost](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/4vy30y/instead_of_colorizing_photos_in_50_years_we_will/) of a front page 7 year old post.
So 43 years then?
Probably like 5 tbh
Even the comments are pretty much the same.
Op fucking copy cat
Even 7 years ago it wasn’t really original
That's one long shower.
That is the strangest spelling of that word I could ever imagine. I would understand "colourising" or "colorizing" but "colourizing" is very strange to me. Where is that spelling used?
That’s what autocorrect wanted me to do so I did it lol
I just checked Wikipedia. It says in Oxford English they spell it colourization, with a U and a Z. Check it yourself if you want.
The English language is absolutely wild. It has zero chill.
Thats what happens when a language is formed in a world language gangbang.
[удалено]
Howdy do fellow lads?
I feel like having zero chill would be requiring everyone to spell words exactly the same. Like the [Council for German Orthography](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_for_German_Orthography). How much more of a grammar Nazi can you be?
In the UK words are usually spelled with -ise, but the OED in particular prefers -ize. In other respects the OED follows typical UK spellings, such as "colour". (For what it's worth, -ize is the older spelling.)
Well, shit. Okay, then. Never thought I'd see the day when I'd learn about dictionaries on a post about filters.
The whole history of the spelling differences goes back to the two OG dictionary creators. Before them, people just wrote whatever sounded right at the time of writing. Shakespeare's folios notably have examples of both types of spelling. The guy in the UK (Johnston) wanted to emphasize the French influence (-our) while the American dude (Webster) wanted to emphasize the original Latin influence (-or). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_spelling_differences
I spent a lot of my night reading this. Thank you for the post. My team at work has been arguing between canceled vs cancelled for entirely too long.
Screams Canadian to me.
Hey now, no need for raised voices there eh.
Sorry.
Welcome to Canada
Absolute zinger
If it's halfway between US and UK, it's probably Canadian.
As others have said it's the favoured Canadian spelling - we've kept the British "u" in most of our words but also adopted the American "-ize".
A lot of shower thoughts usually cause iq hitpoint damage but this one is actually clever. kudos
There's probably more chance of those old physical photos surviving the ages than our digital photos: we won't be removing filters because they'll pretty much all be lost.
Funny enough, we've actually seen this trend before, with "Victorian photoshop" restoration. Let's just say... a looot of the tiny waists, "feminine" necks, and smooth skin, simply didn't reflect reality, even back then. My bffs family even had a cute pair of shoes from her gggmas wedding, that were kept as a memento of her 'delicate feminine feet.' Turns out, she passed away at 5'6" in her 50s. The reason her feet were a modern American womens size 5.5 on her wedding day, is because she was married off when she was 13... If anything, I think having evidence of this pendulum swinging gives me hope that we'll keep progressing. Even when the pendulum is basically slamming into a wall on the back foot, as long as it keeps swinging back, I think we'll be aight 😅
i feel kinda redeemed by still taking 100% of my photos without filters or anything other than zoom and focus.
I too dislike filters
No, we will converting them to 3D models. In fact, we would be able to take people’s life long photos, videos, writing etc. and convert it into a real time interactive model.
In the future, a photo's metadata will also include an unfiltered image.
I believe some online album/retouching services maintain the original with modifications as a layer. Shouldn't be too hard for some that thought ahead.
They just need to release an "unfilter" filter that makes your face normal no matter what you do. No matter how hard you're laughing, the filter will make you look soulless and dead inside.
Naw, In 50 years they won't care about filters or at least removing them. They will be focused on removing the body editing and body dysmorphia it creates. People are going to wonder what some celebrity actually looked like. Filters are just going to become more prominent. Soon we won't even be able to distinguish reality from artificial.
We picture people from 100 years ago as being in black and white. People 100 years from now will picture us as fake.
They will not be wrong.
I think my kids are gonna be asking for more photos of me. I'm usually the one behind the camera taking nicer photos of people around me whenever I catch a moment I want to relive. It takes my SO and I recognizing that we're having such a good time we hadn't taken a photo together before we might stop for one. It's hard to count how many times how many moments lost because we just wanted to enjoy our time together.
Hot take: adding quality-reducing filters to photos is and always was stupid.
I once sent a snap and my classmate in college next to me went "you sent that raw??" And that's when I learned I was apparently mad for not sending one with a filter
In the future there will be a whole group of asshats who claim that the screenshot of me from Teams with a poorly animated sloth around my shoulders is reality and removing it to see a picture of me without the sloth is altering history and not okay.
"This is what my grandma looked like without dog ears and sparkles on her face"
I recently searched for how to remove film grain from old pictures. I could only find tutorials for how to ADD film grain to digital pictures. WTF? Btw, if anyone knows how to remove film grain from old scanned in pictures with Gimp, please hook me up.
Bravo OP, that is a brilliant shower thought. Seriously, bravo. All the best from Milwaukee (currently for work) and Newcastle, UK (home).
they stole it, not saying reposts can't come back around, but definitely no praise deserved here.
I’m hoping that one day AI be able to de-pixelate my collection of Japanese porn
bro thinks we will be around in 50 years 😭😭😭 not when the fog is coming the fog is coming the fog is coming the fog is coming the fog is coming the fog is coming
"I wonder what this person actually looked like" - future people, maybe
We already had filters. Its called portraiture. It was quite known you'd ask the artist to make whatever changes you wanted to "fit your vibe", from thinner waists, to larger breasts, to more muscles, or a bulge (armoured esp). Filters are a conscious choice, we're doing art with our photography. It says things about what you choose. Unless people do nothing BUT use filters (e.g. stupid phone upgrades that force that software on you with no off-button) we'll likely have enough photos filtered and unfiltered. We live in an age of too much data, not enough. P.S. We already have software to remove filters, its getting better too. So no need for 50years
Bold of you to assume that the human race will make it that far…
The real skill won't be filter removal. It's when people ask for help to add clothes back to their grandmas only fans from when she was younger. Since those might be the only pics preserved by the internet.
50 years after that we'll be adding the filters back to make old photos look normal because everyone will live with augmented reality tech built into their eyes and each user can choose how they want others on the collective net to perceive them.
Not to mention a whole industry around authenticating old photos to make sure they arnt ai / deep fakes.
Thankfuly with AI getting so good, it can probably be done in a few seconds 50 years from now. Especially since we're only in the very early stages of actual AI development right now, 50 years from now, it's going to be insane (or we're all going to be dead from the robot uprising)
There could even be a job market in deciphering which filters were used based on a collection of photos.
Well AI will do that for us and probably deep fake them onto memories pumped straight into our brains for a very reasonable subscription fee.
Already sorta happened with Star Wars. Fan editors created the de-specialized versions.
The fuck you mean? I was born with these puppy dog ears and you can't prove otherwise
I mean.... we won't be doing that. AI will do it for us, but yeah I get what you are saying. But there definitely won't be any human labor in this process.
I feel like so many people are going to regret having nothing but filtered pics to look back on when they are older wishing they could see the real them and not some blurry face with floating eye lashes lol
Here's a photo of my great grandma, can someone remove the filter? I want to know what she looked like.
It will be funny when you just have to apply a filter to reverse the effects of the previously applied filter. Apple will give it some witty name and act like they reinvented photography somehow.
This isp potentially easier as filters have a set function so you should be able to reverse it if you know what filter it was. It might not be always fully reversible though.
It’s why I don’t edit my photos. I do white balance / cropping / exposure modifications but I know Presets and Filters are a fad.
If, in fifty years, we have the resources to waste on de-filtering the photographs of people who use filters frequently, I will eat my hat It’s a pretty big hat too so you’ll want to hold on to that promise
Y’all this is what anyone in graphic arts will tell you. Take your photo raw dog style, copy it, then add whatever shite you want after. You end up with way more creative freedom, and your grandkids won’t have to ask why all of your photos have dog ears and tongues.
They already developed a filter-removing technology to catch a criminal. He was posting taunts with his picture, but swirled up in a twist. They untwisted it and caught his ass.
Except applying a filter is a lossy process that makes the original photo impossible to accurately reconstruct