ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Science fights the fakes

Posted: Monday, February 19, 2007 6:55 PM by Alan Boyle

The digital world has made it embarrassingly easy to fake a photograph, as illustrated by the doctored Beirut-bombing photo, the bogus Kerry-and-Fonda pairing and the Katie Couric slim-down plan. The good news is that digital tools are providing new ways to detect image manipulation - in fact, a Dartmouth College researcher says he's helping The Associated Press develop a system for finding fakes on the fly. The bad news is that this could mark just one more phase in an "arms race" between the fakers and the fake-fighters.

Dartmouth computer scientist Hany Farid discussed his work on photo verification over the weekend in San Francisco, during the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Other experts on art analysis explored how digital analysis is being applied to artistic masterpieces as well.

Farid is hoping that his approach to "camera ballistics" will take some of the controversy out of the news-photo business. Just as a handgun leaves a signature on bullets for ballistics experts to analyze, digital cameras leave a signature on the pictures that they record - in the subtle pattern of electronic noise distributed through the data, as well as in the algorithms used to compress the image for storage.

The system that AP is considering would give a quick scan to the thousands of photos coming in from shooters around the world, Farid said. If there's something inconsistent about a picture's digital signature, that could raise a red flag.

Farid hopes such a system could be developed not only by AP, but by the world's other major photo agencies as well. "Just telling people that 'we have a policy and we're looking' will scare off most people," he said.

Digital analysis should be able to pick up your typical photo fakery, but Farid is under no illusion that computer science can bring a complete end to doctored images.

"It is an arms race, and I can tell you who's going to win: It's not us," he said. "It's the same as spam vs. anti-spam filters."

Farid acknowledged that the payoffs for doctored pictures might not be as obvious as they are for, say, sending massive amounts of spam or counterfeiting $100 bills. "Although I would argue that photographers, especially free-lancers, do have a financial interest," he added. "To get their images published, there is a huge demand for that super-sexy, dramatic photograph."

Speaking of payoffs, millions of dollars can be at stake when it comes to identifying fakes in the art world. For instance, is that "Jackson Pollock" actually a Jackson Pollock? That question has generated a lot of controversy in the past month: Dartmouth researcher Daniel Rockmore said digital fractal analysis has played a supporting role in excluding some works attributed to Pollock.

Ellen Handy, an art historian at the City College of New York, said the Pollock case is far from settled: "Opinions in our art historical community are equally divided."

At the same time, she welcomed anything that can help historians understand the scientific factors behind artistic genius. "We urgently need all the tools we can get," she said.

Rockmore, an expert in the emerging field of digital stylometry, said computers provide just one line of evidence for art sleuths. "Asking for this machine that's going to say 'fake or not fake' is too much," he acknowledged.

But the technique has already turned up some interesting results. Farid, Rockmore and their colleagues at Dartmouth have used computer analysis to determine that parts of Perugino's "Madonna With Child" were done by the master's apprentices. They've also found geometric characteristics, called wavelets, that can distinguish the works of Pieter Bruegel the Elder from imitations (PDF file). 

The technique is controversial today, but Rockmore hopes that digital stylometry will eventually become a universally accepted tool of the art curator's trade. It wouldn't be the first time. "Fifty years ago," he said, "no curator wanted to look at an X-ray of a painting." 

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

As with spam, the best defense against fake photographs may be for people to stop responding to them. I remember a photography magazine ran a cover article called something like "The end of photography as proof of anything". That was decades ago, but it still hasn't sunk in. As long as people automatically accept a photograph as the gospel truth, people will continue to make fakes.
I understand that the combining of two technologies is one way to defeat expert fraud detection. For instance, take a photograph doctor it up and then scan it into electronic format. Once converted to electronic format then seams or textures or whatever on the original doctored photo is unavailable. An expert in digital fraud is now looking at the jpeg or gif and he doesn't know anything about photo fraud. The reverse is also plausable. The electronic format could be photographed and then expert called to task would be a photo lab technician and unversed in photoshop modifications.
There is a better solution. It's called "film".
I'm disappointed that you're not getting with the program.

See, these here so-called computer "scientists" can speculate all they want.  It's ONLY a theory.  After all, nobody was there to actually SEE these supposed fraudsters doctor the photos, therefore it's all JUST SPECULATION and inference.  (Can I get a big "well, duh!")
It goes to prove that good old fashion film still has its place as it is a lot harder to make an excellent fake on a physical negative or slide, though not impossible obviously.
Throughout the ages it's always been "Buyer Beware". Why should today be any different?  How about "A fool and his money are soon departed"?

The first of anything, if it's of real value, should be in a museum. Why must we pretend to concern ourselves with micromanaging the commerce between two or more parties we hold very little trust in to begin with?
I forget his name, but if you look on the collage I made of Apollo (the one with Kennedy, the vehicle assembly building etc.), I replaced some president in the painting behind Kennedy with the photo of the Russian scientist from ~1906 who was the first to propose liquid fueled rockets, stages, etc... :)

In general, I had a lot of time to kill at work and I'd often play with a basic photo editor.  Some southern state was complaining about flooding when the water was barely a foot deep.  I therefore took it upon my self to doctor the photo.  I sank the cars down to the door handles, added rescue workers... I even remembered to lower the mailboxes.  Perhaps adding a heavily armed Sarah Connor (from T2) to show a bit of civilian upheaval was a bit of overkill though...  Ha-ha!


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=60203

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google