Technology

59201 readers

3332 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

226

A bride to be discovers a reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography (appleinsider.com)

submitted 11 months ago by stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to c/technology@lemmy.world

89 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A U.K. woman was photographed standing in a mirror where her reflections didn't match, but not because of a glitch in the Matrix. Instead, it's a simple iPhone computational photography mistake.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] falkerie71@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I can also see the three arm positions being a single motion, just in three different time frames. If it really takes seconds to complete a composite, then it should also be very easy to reproduce, and not something so rare it makes it into the news. If I still can't convince you, I guess we agree to disagree then.

[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

then it should also be very easy to reproduce, and not something so rare it makes it into the news.

And it is, according to the article. Just in case you haven't read.

It has made headlines not because it's rare, but because it's outrageous. Just in case you haven't noticed.

[–] falkerie71@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

Please, feel free to reproduce one yourself then. And no, using the panorama trick doesn't count, which I think the "silly photos" in the article may be actually referencing instead of this.

And is it really "outrageous"? At most I think this is amusing. Nowhere in the article gave me the impression that this is something that people need to be extremely angry about, Mr. Just in case.