Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Good ideas at the time.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                           

EyeOpener

For habitual photoblinkers
  (+7, -1)
(+7, -1)
  [vote for,
against]

This is inspired by Daseva's "Red Nose Removal". (OK, OK, it's an inferior echo of Daseva's "Red Nose Removal". We all have dry patches.)

A camera flash operates in something like a squinth of a second. The camera shutter itself operates in anything from a 30th to a 1000th of second, depending on conditions and settings.

Nevertheless, I always ALways ALWAYS (ie, often) manage to blink at exactly the instant when the flash flashes or the shutter shuts.

Being photographed in mid-blink is not flattering. Your face lacks the calm repose of sleep, and the closed eyes set in an otherwise awake visage merely make you look somewhat retarded.

Since red-eye (and now red-nose) removal is straightforward using software, why can't we have shut-eye removal? It should not be difficult for the software to recognise a human face, and to determine that the two mainly-white shapes are missing; it should also be possible for it to identify the shallow U-curve of the eyelashes on the closed eyelids.

Once the eyelash-curve has been parsed, it simply needs mirroring about a line from one end to the other, to create a pinched ellipse which will be a reasonable approximation of the subject's eye shape. Simply fill this ellipse with white (and an iris of course - colour selectable) and the problem is solved.

MaxwellBuchanan, Sep 15 2008

Facial identification camera Facial_20identification_20camera
"While it's at it, the camera could recognize that all the people in the picture are looking at the camera, with their eyes open, and smiling"
-Dub, Feb 22 2008
[phoenix, Sep 15 2008]

smile camera http://gizmodo.com/...gapixels-292473.php
google up "smile camera" and you can buy one today. [ericscottf, Sep 16 2008]

(?) So not a problem for this guy. http://www.deadment...c/images/2eyes1.jpg
[2 fries shy of a happy meal, Sep 16 2008, last modified Sep 17 2008]

You mean like this? http://upload.wikim.../42/Churchkey01.jpg
That's gonna leave a mark [normzone, Sep 18 2008]

[link]






       // We all have dry patches //   

       Not all of us. You can get ointment for it now.   

       Will not this idea discriminate against those with but a single eye in the centre of their forehead ?   

       SImpler solution -supply each camera with a tube of cyanoacrillate adhesive for gluing eyelids open, or perhaps a small staple gun ....... [+]
8th of 7, Sep 15 2008
  

       Right on! Glad to spark a (tiny) flame ;) everybody say pastryy!! <flash!> <casually shuts eyes> +
daseva, Sep 15 2008
  

       //Gonna make it hard to take a photo of people with their eyes shut.//   

       There will be a switch.
MaxwellBuchanan, Sep 16 2008
  

       A pleasure to read. [+]
Texticle, Sep 16 2008
  

       Why not prevent the problem instead of fixing it?   

       Human eyeblinks take about 0.1 second (100 ms), and are frequently triggered by the "pre-flash" exposure determination light from the (modern)flash. Simply time the imaging flash to occcur more than ~150ms after the "pre-flash," guaranteeing open eyes.   

       Similar auditory pre-shutter sounds could work for shutter-caused blinks.
csea, Sep 16 2008
  

       When I'm taking group photos, particularly of children, I just take several photos and Photoshop together a composite where everyone is not looking silly. Group photos are a particular problem. If an individual is looking non-photogenic a fraction of the time p, then the probability of a photo of n people having everyone in it looking OK is (1-p)^n. So, if you take a lot of photos (m) of a group and you want a greater than 50% probability of taking at least 1 good photo, you want the probability of at least one person looking bad in every photo to be less than 50%, or

(1-(1-p)^n)^m < 0.5

Putting numbers in, if your group size (n) is 10 people and each person looks not-OK 30% of the time (a generous measure for children), then m, the number of photos you have to take before getting a greater than 50% chance of a shot with everyone looking OK is 25. This doesn't allow for your subjects becoming bored, which is why it's easier to just take half a dozen shots and Photoshop together a composite.
hippo, Sep 17 2008
  

       //When I'm taking group photos, particularly of children, I just take several photos and Photoshop together a composite where everyone is not looking silly. Group photos are a particular problem.//
solid work, [hippo].
daseva, Sep 17 2008
  

       //When I'm taking group photos, particularly of children, I just take several photos and Photoshop together a composite where everyone is not looking silly. Group photos are a particular problem.//
solid work, [hippo].
daseva, Sep 17 2008
  

       I'm with you, [MaxwellBuchanan]. I'm a blinker.
normzone, Sep 18 2008
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle