For the people interested in media fakery.....

Voor de mensen die hebben wat interesse over ‘fakery in the media’….
Weer ‘n fascinerende stuk op clues forum. De reacties en meningen zijn ook heel wardevol vind ik.
Mooi geschreven,goed uitgezocht,intelligent,informatief,ground-breaking stuff.
Ik zou heel graag meningen horen van mensen die hebben wat ervaring en kennis met computer generated imagery,morphing software enz.

Is Edward Snowden ‘n echte mens of ‘n CGI entity?
Daar is er ook interessant discussie over…..en ‘n paar demo videos van CGI technology.
Ik weet zelf niet zeker als Snowden ‘n echte mens is,maar ik geloof in idere geval geen reet van het hele verhaal dat we krijgen van t mass media.
Enjoy!

The probability of simulated model entities in adverts
by ‘ icarusinbound’ at September Clues forum.

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1695

The probability of simulated model entities in adverts.

Often we hear the mainstream media proudly make aphoristic comments to the effect that technological developments which have their origins within a military context always eventually feed back into the world of the consumer. Your life is made sweeter, the world is made better: or, at least that is the projected intent.

These retro-vindications of the payback-benefits from tax-payers' money being invested are perhaps somewhat vaguer than they were back in the heady days of eg NASA's product placement (teflon/velcro/watches/cameras). Perhaps there are good tactical reasons for that.

Consider the highly-defendable postulation identified within this forum regarding the existence of what are being termed ''Vicsims"- a label that has already gained a currency far beyond the borders of this forum. The logical inference is that the technology potentially used to create these virtual non-persons has been at a high-end military/government/blue-chip developmental level. With the passage of time since 2001, it is reasonable to predict that this putative technology has (in part or whole) leaked to other sectors, been deliberately commercialised, or independently developed through convergent research. By this, I mean the indexed creation of digital imagery that depicts the photographic likeness and apparent realism of individuals that have never existed, for the purposes of commercial advertising, entertainment and social education.

For the purposes of this discursive topic, I'm going to refer to such a concept as 'Adsims': advertising simulated model entities. These pixel non-people, if they can definitively be said to exist, might even be argued by an advertising executive or marketing manager as being entirely-legitimate: within their weltanschauung , the concept may be a shared unspoken truth.

Consider the advantages: no reliance upon awkward human models that are the wrong age/race/look, no post-campaign embarrassments of lifestyle derailment, no diva tantrums, no copyright clearances, no personal payment. It would be a logical step beyond the extensive Photoshop editing of imperfect biological specimens: cut them literally out of the picture from the outset. Adsims would be easy to own, simple to control, and by definition, perfect for their function..

Of course we all know that direct-from-computer visual images of virtual people exist. But they're always depicted as obviously being so. Either via non-subtle hints of skin-tone, or colour, or overt statement. They form the declared foundation of accepted unreality: and they're nearly always advised to us consumers as having originated from Japan / China / Korea. So we can all rest easy, here in the moralistic principled western hemisphere of consumerdome, we shall always know when we are being duped. All the images we see of sporting icons, pop stars, advertisement models: we can rest assured that since they all look so real, they must be real. Otherwise we'd know, wouldn't we....?

But: have the mannequins already jumped from shop windows into the Windows on your computer? And, since we are all required to be social media co-dependants, do some 'Adsims' possess that essential layer of 21st century patency: a digital footprint?

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 februari 2014 17:08 schreef Enneacanthus_Obesus het volgende:
En hoe leg je eigenlijk de link tussen Snowden en die technologie? Je bron heeft het er totaal niet over.

Als je verder lezen op de clues forum thread er is discussie over de mogelijkheden dat Snowden niet 'n echte mens is.

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 februari 2014 16:44 schreef .SP. het volgende:
En je dacht dat de Russen spelletje meespelen met een CGI Snowden?

En dat stuk, mijn god, iemand die inhoudlijk niet veel te melden heeft en dit verstopt door onnodig moeilijke woorden te gebruiken.

Tis toch heel netjes in 't Engels geschreven,ja.

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 februari 2014 17:43 schreef theguyver het volgende:

[..]

De photoshop techniek is aardig ver, ( ze worden beter maar het verschil valt nog steeds te zien) CGI valt makkelijk door heen te prikken althans als jee veel films kijkt, en in jou geval het nieuws
Ik zie het nut niet de halve wereld is pissed op de VS omdat er behoorlijk wat op straat is gekomen, sites als wikileaks, wat me alles behalve een overheid site is publiceert heel wat materiaal wat voor verschillende landen erg schadelijk is.

Dus my main question is.
WHY?

Eerlijk gezegd ik heb niet veel te discussieren met jou....en wat ik wel heb te zeggen wordt ik waarschijnlijk weer gebande door t gebruik van sarcastische/spontaan/scherp/persoonlijk opmerkingen.
Kom met iets interessants, dan, misschien.

quote:

Op dinsdag 4 februari 2014 18:33 schreef Lavenderr het volgende:

[..]

Wat Wat is het dan?

'N CGI karakter.
Denk aan heel geavanceerd technologie.....er is geen twijfel dat dat soort technologie bestaat.