I'd like to share an interesting paper, https://graphics.stanford.edu/~niessner/papers/2016/1facetoface/thies2016face.pdf.
It presents a method for fusing two videos in real-time: "target" video of a person, "source" video of another actor into resulting video of target person performing moves of source person.
It presents a method for fusing two videos in real-time: "target" video of a person, "source" video of another actor into resulting video of target person performing moves of source person.
The video accompanying the paper ( Face2Face: Real-time Face Capture and Reenactment of RGB Videos (CVPR 2016 Oral) ) shows sample results of such reenactment.
The method presented in this paper is not perfect, authors state that beards or long hairs can present a problem, but we can expect further developments.
- Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
- How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
- Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteHmmm, I don't think that for example politicians are aware of this and also they care about synthesized video, they would probably aquire TV station and from there they would do synthesis of information. But this could be real weapon against people, celebrities and others because it is very hard to prove that you are not a horse (if someone will tell you that he saw you in the news and your were involved in something which is not true then showing that this is fake can be real hard and may costs you a lot of effort, money and health).
How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
When it comes to movies I don't think that this should be very important aspect because you can put sombeody into movie after movie shots were taken. But when it comes to theaters and maybe museums this could be very interesting. For example adding many instances of you in different era of human civilization and then you could interact with them in real time.
We already have movies (animated) with localized parts: cupcakes in "Monsters Inc" or language on signs in "Where is Dory": http://www.pixarpost.com/2015/01/laura-meyer-localization.html
DeleteWe could go one step further and correct the lip sync to match local language in movies with real actors.
I don't think that modern technology is necessary for news being faked, biased and manipulated. Press had tricks for that from the beginning. Reporters could record interviews and then edit it according to their needs, photoshop pictures etc. Advancements in technological aspects of that practices don't change too much in that matter for me. Even without that technology important news requires deep analysis to form an opinion based on facts rather than opinions presented as they were facts.
ReplyDeleteMaybe it could be used in psychological therapies. For example, people who experienced a trauma because of other people could literally face their offenders played by a therapist. Or people who can't agree with a loss of someone could call "them" on skype which also could be some form of a therapy. For this use case, the real-time aspect would be critical.
That is interesting, I haven't thought about therapeutic usage. Would be something like treating phantom limb pains with famous mirror trick.
Delete1. Unfortunately, I think, that the end of the truth in news has already taken place. I mean we haven’t even see this moment when it happened. Personally, I have very critical attitude to Polish sources, there are the news it is better to check on foreign portals. They can also be modified, but comparing the data gained from them to the further reality, you can choose those which logically link that.
ReplyDelete2. For me real-time aspects is important, because it gives a feeling of world-wide community, when we can be witnesses of something taking place far away from us. It helps lonely people to feel better, when they watch or communicate with someone physically distant. Real-time aspect finally builds psychological link between people.
As for Princess Leia, I think she could be synthesized different, although I have no real idea, what for people make their life more difficult that it is….
3. Such technique may be well used, when there is a need to show something important which is difficult to show by actors, reluctantly played by them or controversial to perform.
1. Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteThis is really frightening. I don’t watch TV and for a long time I am not trusting any media sources. Unfortunately there is not many sources we can trust and a lot of people are easy manipulate. I think that people should became aware of the technology and how this will affect them. After watching this video I realised in how many places it can be used.
2. How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
Honestly I don’t believe in any “real-time” shows and programs, because we cannot be sure that they really are. I am not an expert so I cannot say what is possible and what is not, but probably the technique will be better and better so it will be at one point possible.
3. Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
I would say that maybe comedians can use it, but at the same time it is not a good idea either. I see a lot of bad usages - faking Skype job interviews, using someones image and saying something he would never say, and many many more.
I agree with Adam, modern technology is not really needed to manipulate news and present fake, biased and blurred pieces of information. It's just another option that can be added to many other ones that have been known for centuries now. As far as questions 2 and 3 are concerned, I also do not believe in real-time programmes. In my opinion everything can be manipulated and altered, even something that theoretically is broadcasted in real time. I cannot think of any positive usage of this technique. Only negative examples comes to my mind.
ReplyDeleteThank you for this article. It is amazingly interesting.
ReplyDeleteDo you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
Not quite the end. The detection of this type of activity is the end for a television station. Although, the utterance of the person exposing the entire incident can also be manipulated. :)
Is there any "good" usage of this technique in your opinion?
Prktically, any technology can be used to do good or evil. The best example is always a knife. :)
TV stations are not the only source of video clips anymore: all those virally-spreading funny clips - it might be hard to trace its origins. And, with polarized societies like USA or Poland, in social media we often live in kind of echo chamber. The rigor of proof is much lower for information from "our" camp (because *we* are the goodies). This might lead to further strengthening of divides.
DeleteAs my colleagues said, I also think that the end of real news already took place. What is more, I think there was never a phenomenon of "real news", because each opinion is in some way distracted by the writer's subjective point of view. But if we are talking about manipulation by the real-time broadcast data changing then answer is yes, I think that it could be used soon. What's more, I'm already waiting for that since this paper had been published :) It's going be the real public discussion about media independence after that.
ReplyDeleteGood usage of that technique could be, as Adam said, psychological therapies, from my point of view.
1. Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteYeah, it may be the end but I think that presented topic isn’t the immediate cause. In my opinion the biggest influence on the loss of media reliability is either current authority - in the case of public media, or the political option of private media owners.
2. How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
Real-time is crucial because it requires much more than a simple reconstruction. Unfortunately, I haven’t seen any part of Star Wars, so it's hard to say. I believe it is possible however I suppose it may be very complicated.
3. Is there any "good" usage of such technique in your opinion?
Yes, for sure. For example, it can be used in real-time shows for children or in the reconstruction of the crime. I agree that there are more bad uses of this technique than the good ones.
3. That's it! Children shows, and movie versions for hearing impaired person: when lips are synced to their native language, McGurk effect kicks in and it's easier to understand. In fact, even persons with good hearing would benefit from it.
Delete1. Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteI think it becomes a bigger and bigger problem. There is a popular statement "pics or it didn't happen". But how can we trust the photos after seeing outputs from Photoshop?
Before the TV and radio era people could truly believe only those things they saw and the people they trusted told them.
Then, we had TV, radio, internet, so we could quickly find something. And nowadays? I think history repeats itself.
2. How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
Real-time is harder to achieve.
3. Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
There are already tools dedicated for video chats, where your face and its movement is used as a base for some animal or a cartoon guy. You can use it to make some fun with your friends. I think becoming an actor or a famous person can be funny as well.
1. Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteI think it will create a new branch of services that will guarantee that presented information are not fake
2. How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
A lot of things related with technology have two sides. Great that you can “revive” person for movie, but if you use it to create fake news/information that you are entering the dark side 😉
3. Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
As mentioned in previous point, yes
1. Do You think such guarantees would be implemented by technology or rather a result of reputation-based system?
DeleteDo you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion this will not change much. In times we are living where content his strictly target at every single viewer there is no such thing as truth in the news.
How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
I do not think this is so much important. For sure it is harder to chive but from the viewer perspective this does not make a difference
Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
Bots and automated assistance tools could use this technique for sure.
Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteI think this approach will not change much in this field. Now, we cannot believe in everything we see. It is like with the posts on Instagram, videos of bloggers on YouTube. Everything may be a medium and offer an advert.
How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
It might be vital to reach the recipients immediately because the impact of an advert is greater.
Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
I think ant Artificial Intelligence tools like virtual assistants may be example of a good usage of this technique. Medical treatment is also a possible way of use of this technique.
We can't believe, but are we ready for perpetual April Fools? ;-)
DeleteDo you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion it will not affect the truth in news. Today we can cut the film, add special effects etc., but it usually is not used to manipulate the news. The technology itself should not be treated as a danger, the way it is used may be, but in this case I don't think that we should be worried.
How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
For sure, 'real-time' effects are more difficult to achieve. There is no possibility to review and improve synthesized picture.
Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
Sure, in entertainment it might give the ability to change the movie according to the response of the audience. It can be used in education or medicine also. I am sure that a lot of interesting ideas will occur when the technology will be improved.
I think end of truth in news started a long time ago.
ReplyDeleteSorry, I can't see any important applications for this technology.
Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteThe truth will always be added to the mix, to make the narrative plausible. This is not much different from current media practices. In other words, I agree with most people that the end of truth in news is already behind us, but there may come a time when truth comes to surface, even in the presence of such tremendously advanced technologies for manipulation.
How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
As you suggest, I think the real-time is a quantitative measure, not a qualitative one. We could already photoshop every separate frame if necessary (or apply some non-linear video editing filters, which I know exist, but can't produce the names of). The advances in technology and algorithms just made it cheaper and faster.
Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
Well, I see many good uses - for one: computer games. When playing on-line multi-player, the avatars will be able to talk and mimic facial expressions of the players behind. You can have interactive movies, where you star in it (only after a short session in front of the camera, to reconstruct your mouth interior). People with facial burns (e.g. from acid attacks, which have grown in London), will be able to record video messages showing their faces intact.
Thank you for an interesting article, I have not heard about it before. The media now also cope well with the creative presentation of information and the appropriate distribution of accents. However, it has always been like that. Perhaps the best method is to average the received message. Unfortunately, I do not know the answer to your second question. In relation to the last one, probably positive applications are also possible but it is more difficult to see them ...
ReplyDelete1.Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteThanks for this article. This is very intriguing question. We have to analyse if news and information which we are served are true or not all the time but this is another easy way to falsificate facts. Sometimes a proper photo with a good description is enough to show facts in different light so I don't want to think how this tachnique can be used.
2. How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
It depends how it is used. If only for simulation then it is not but if it is shown with a human then I think it is.
3. Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
I think of films and animations. It would be easier to create a character and animate his face using this tool, savig time and money probably. Todays animations are still not good enough however.
3. Like when You need a Dragon, but only have Sherlock Holmes and results are great? ;-)
Delete1.Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteI think that we are watching for fakes news many times per day. They don't have to been synthesized,but distorted for better viewership.
2.How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
Real time aspect is the most important,but I'm not sure if it is possible.
3.Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
For entertainment or better film effects.
> Real time aspect is the most important,but I'm not sure if it is possible.
DeleteThe whole point of the presentation was to show it being done in real-time :->
Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting question. We shouldn't. At least we should spend some time on trying to validate what we have seen. Of course, it's a bit harder, but having different point of view is always better than blindly following and believing in everything.
How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
It's a break trough for sure. However, let's imagine situation where someone decides to synthesize Putin and declare war with China.
Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
Movies mostly. Maybe holograms made from only audio tracks :)
Do you think it's the end of truth in news? If any statement or interview can be synthesized, how can we believe anything we see?
ReplyDeleteI think it is not the end of truth in news, but access to the truth would be a little bit harder. Nowadays portals are not independent sources of information. That means that when we are reading something we have to take this point into account. Unfortunately a lot of portals use copy-paste method to share “hot-news”. It does not take any effort to verify news, which could be fake.
How important is "real-time" aspect? Is possibility to e.g. synthesize Princess Leia in new Star Wars that much different?
Good real time production is harder to achieve, because you can not analyse and review it.
Is there any "good" usage of such technique in Your opinion?
I think everything in entertainment area… maybe it can be used to increase children activity during real-time session. But everything has scenario ;)
Thanks a lot for sharing this amazing knowledge with us. This site is fantastic. I always find great knowledge from it. Broward County Divorce lawyer
ReplyDelete