One of my favorite seldom-updated websites, Autodesk's "Fake or Foto Challenge", has recently been graced once again with a new set of images to test your eye: http://area.autodesk.com/fakeorfoto/challenge
Can you tell which images are computer generated and which are real? Post your score after you take the test. Mine: 11 out of 12. And maybe note which ones you missed (but not what the answers are!). Mine was the peppers. ;D
- Oshyan
Oh I thought you missed 11 out of 12 ;D lol
I'll try this later, but I can guarantee I will score 50% at most :)
nightmare...only got 6....
10/12 I actually suspect everything to be CG these days. MATRIX!!!
Oh and I failed the fork and the lady
Only 6 - and I went with most cg
An embarrassing 8. Not sure I should continue my day job!
lol, I did not do so well either...
5!
The lowest yet! :-[
I started at 6, but I realized later I could enlarge the pictures which made it easier. 9 or 10 out of 12 was the result then.
The fork and key are difficult. Scratches and wearing can be made pretty convincing with patience, as the barb wire shows, so I really tend to get in doubt then.
Some of them were also easy, like the Seat car and the old chinese.
You could enlarge the pics? Oh well next time...
got caught by the lady -_-'
Well I should just quit my job...
against all odds I only got the car right. ???
Quote from: Matt on December 09, 2010, 08:53:11 AM
An embarrassing 8. Not sure I should continue my day job!
Hahaha, that was the funniest line I have read today!
... thinking about it, in fact I had nothing to laugh at all to day, except for this line :D
You've cheered me up :)
Quote from: FrankB on December 09, 2010, 02:05:06 PM
Hahaha, that was the funniest line I have read today!
... thinking about it, in fact I had nothing to laugh at all to day, except for this line :D
You've cheered me up :)
Glad I could make a difference :)
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on December 09, 2010, 10:22:46 AM
The fork and key are difficult.
I got both of those right. The ones I got wrong were an equal mixture of false positives and false negatives.
Boolean nors. ;D
It was very easy to guess the Cg in the past.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh7vJ4g3Z5o
The scenes in this demo had CG where i thought they were . But i was quite surprised to see CG were i didn't suspected.
And this is a TV show! Software and the users are so advanced that i think i can not predict the CG effects as i used to do in the past anymore.
The image sharing section here has some nice renders that many people would think as photos too.
Eee...
Ok...i failed miserably too :)
50%. Dang I got the car wrong, lulled by the background! I usually try to look for uneven patterns, like the cracked wood, but some textures can be extremely convincing. Oh well, get ready for many more fake photos :)
I was struggling with the cobweg image first. My brother specializes on macro photography, and has a couple photos like that. But the bokeh gave it away for me. A photo lens bokeh looks different.
I also though the car was real, becauase of the backdrop. With some other images, I think some of the motifs weren't special complex enough - they could be both CG or real nowadays with no visible difference.
Anyway, nice challenge.
Cheers,
Frank
The lighting of the car is completely off from its environment, in my opinion.
Only with reflective panels outside of the image at the right could create such (bright) light.
Also, the tires are clearly CG, especially the most left wheel in the image.
the lighting was interesting, true. But I think that for stock photography, a model such as that car would be artificially lit by lots of light screens, soo... it could have been real in that regard.
6 out of 12
Where's OB? He's really good at these.
Ouch!
I got 5 out of 12. Just shows how good computers can fake real images. I got the man wrong, along with ... uh ... the chair, the key, the peppers, .....
I only missed one!!!! ;D
That fucking key, hahah, it got me!!!!1 >:(
I missed the chair and the kitchen, although in retrospect I'm seeing some indicators in both of them that I ignored. If you look closely at the metal on the key, fork, vase, and juicer you can tell which textures are repeating and which aren't. The car was clearly fake to me because of the overly clean tires contrasting against the systematic dirt layers around each wheel well. The portrait and the spider both were given away by bokeh, the eye by the texture of the skin and quality of the hair, and the peppers by the pattern and look of the dust on the table.
If you say so... ::)
Seriously, thanks for checking in. This helps...me understand I don't know anything. I appreciate it - putting me in my place. LOL I'm glad you are explaining, though this sort of thing is too much for my brain to quickly realize. I don't know how you do it.
Quote from: old_blaggard on December 27, 2010, 05:32:20 PM
I missed the chair and the kitchen, although in retrospect I'm seeing some indicators in both of them that I ignored. If you look closely at the metal on the key, fork, vase, and juicer you can tell which textures are repeating and which aren't. The car was clearly fake to me because of the overly clean tires contrasting against the systematic dirt layers around each wheel well. The portrait and the spider both were given away by bokeh, the eye by the texture of the skin and quality of the hair, and the peppers by the pattern and look of the dust on the table.