• 0 Posts
  • 10 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: October 6th, 2024

help-circle
  • It’s racism in the sense I mentioned. It was tested and built around white people. It didn’t work as well on black people (requires more work, gear, and technique to get similar results). No one was in any real hurry to fix that.

    I might have been hyperbolic with features void. But yeah it was a problem. That should have taught us that this problem would come in ai.



  • Silver iodide plates don’t respond to red light. They respond better to blue and violet. That alone doesn’t cause the problem but it’s part of it. I can’t remember where I read that tho

    Without special lighting black people became a dark void. You could photograph them with special lighting and different techniques but that mostly wasn’t done.

    So I think it’s fair to say it didn’t work well for darker skin tones because in order to get a picture with similar quality you had to work a lot harder.

    I do agree in the later days it was more a specific caused by racism but from the beginning it was more difficult to photograph darker skin tones and no one really cared because of racism. I wasn’t caused by the racism tho. It was caused by the technology at that time… that no one cared enough to fix it.

    That mentality carried on until I believe the Kodachrome made all the world a sunny day. I’m not an expert tho.


  • The early days cameras were less sensitive to red light needed for darker skin tones. Some of this could be overcome with lighting that wasn’t readily available.

    It possible to do it sure, you could make a picture that was close to the clarity of lighter skin tone. If you have to put in a lot of extra effort and time (that often wasn’t done at all) to take the same picture you could of a white person, I’d say that means the film doesn’t work well with black people. It clearly wasn’t particle because people rarely put in the effort to properly light them.

    Why argue with something we have facts about? I didn’t make this up in a shower. I read it in articles written by professionals.

    To give an example. I don’t drive a Ferrari . With a new engine and modifications I could make it as fast as a Ferrari . Or I could slash the tires of the Ferrari. However I can’t go around saying “my car is as fast as a Ferrari because if I put the effort in it would be as fast”

    I didn’t, and it isn’t.

    If you have to put a lot of extra work into something to make it equal, then it isn’t equal.


  • Aeao@lemmy.worldtoProgrammer Humor@programming.dev•limitations
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    What’s funny is this was all predictable. We had the same problem when we started with photography in general. It worked well on white people but made every black person a featureless black void.

    Turns out we test these things mainly on white men then call it a success when it works exclusively for us white men.




  • No, nobody will pay a fee. There’s a fee if the customer cancels if the uber cancels no one gets charged. (They can get in trouble for canceling too often but I’m sure this wouldn’t count against him if they were in fact under 13)

    It’s policy for the driver to cancel because they are refusing service. No one canceld. There shouldn’t be a cancellation fee.

    The uber driver is the one breaking the rules here to try and squeeze a cancelation fee out of her. She didn’t cancel, the uber refused service. You don’t get paid for refusing service in any industry.

    If the customer lied or cheated or whatever to get them there then the driver should report THAT to uber and maybe get them kicked from the platform.

    But no you don’t get paid for refusing service. anywhere.