[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / cyoa / funegros / girltalk / hisrol / imouto / tacos / terka / wx ][Options][ watchlist ]

/tech/ - Technology

You can now write text to your AI-generated image at https://aiproto.com It is currently free to use for Proto members.
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Select/drop/paste files here
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Expand all images

[–]

 No.911497>>911572 >>911962 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]

Identifying Original Images

Is there a reliable means to identify the original (or most original) image out of a collection of visually identical images?

Take this Google search as an example:

https://www.google.com/search?q=sivir+pizza&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSlQEJqhGDC51Lm6AaiQELEKjU2AQaAggVDAsQsIynCBpiCmAIAxIotRz8H6MRvR7EHLgctBybEbYcxR7qI4Qk9SG4LPghhSS1LOspzyzHLBowTPH6t8ZdmVJa7U53gi3plMY4GJKAWFetY6BNkirteMeMvlBOGGSYD5rV0oYPPZpLIAQMCxCOrv4IGgoKCAgBEgRbccE9DA,isz:l&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj4pJ-RyvfaAhUmSN8KHStUCsoQ2A4oA3oECAAQKQ&biw=1032&bih=748

The same image is available in so many different dimensions, but only one is the original image (or at least as close to the original as you'll get).

You can obviously zoom in for a close inspection and rule out images with visible artifacting, but that can be quite tedious. A sure-fire way is to eliminate images with watermarks or where obvious cropping exists in comparison to other images.

Still, seems like there is a more reliable means to identify originals that doesn't involve painstaking inspection with the naked eye.

 No.911499>>911503 >>911504

Well, you can always use attributions to trace it to its source. Furthermore, if it's quality you want, you can just use Waifu2x.


 No.911502

So I am pretty sure pic related is the original. It's PNG, and while that doesn't necessarily guarantee higher quality as someone could have just saved a JPG as PNG, it still looks flawless when you zoom in.


 No.911503>>911507

>>911499

Also, why not sort by date? It seems obvious that the oldest one would be most likely to be the original.


 No.911504>>911506

>>911499

>attributions

Explain


 No.911506>>911509

>>911504


From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 [gcide]:

Attribution \At`tri*bu"tion\, n. [L. attributio: cf. F.
attribution.]
1. The act of attributing or ascribing, as a quality,
character, or function, to a thing or person, an effect to
a cause.
[1913 Webster]

2. That which is ascribed or attributed.
[1913 Webster]


 No.911507>>911510

>>911503

This would be a good additional measure, but no guarantee. Any idea how to sort ascending by date on Google?


 No.911509

>>911506

Yeah, I looked that up, but still don't know how I would utilize this to trace an image to its source.


 No.911510

>>911507

Make a shell script to get image URLs from jewgle image search, then use wget to download each one, making sure to preserve the original timestamp. Then use ordinary methods to sort by timestamp.


 No.911572

>>911497 (OP)

You could try contacting the people hosting the image.


 No.911625

>Jewgle

>Normie game (((porn)))

Reported


 No.911962




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Screencap][Nerve Center][Cancer][Update] ( Scroll to new posts) ( Auto) 5
11 replies | 1 images | Page ?
[Post a Reply]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / cyoa / funegros / girltalk / hisrol / imouto / tacos / terka / wx ][ watchlist ]