iOS 13 Will Add Fake Eye Contact To FaceTime For Improved Intimacy 73
iOS 13's third developer beta includes a new feature that makes it look like you're staring directly at your front-facing camera during FaceTime calls, even when looking away at the person on your screen. The Verge reports: Normally, video calls tend to make it look like both participants are peering off to one side or the other, since they're looking at the person on their display, rather than directly into the front-facing camera. However, the new "FaceTime Attention Correction" feature appears to use some kind of image manipulation to correct this, and results in realistic-looking fake eye contact between the FaceTime users.
On Twitter, Dave Schukin explains that the effect is being achieved using ARKit, which is used to map a user's face and adjust the positioning of their eyes accordingly. Using the arm from a pair of glasses, Schukin shows how the software is warping the eye area slightly to achieve the effect. The same effect also appears to be present when wearing sunglasses.
On Twitter, Dave Schukin explains that the effect is being achieved using ARKit, which is used to map a user's face and adjust the positioning of their eyes accordingly. Using the arm from a pair of glasses, Schukin shows how the software is warping the eye area slightly to achieve the effect. The same effect also appears to be present when wearing sunglasses.
Creepy as shit (Score:2)
Here's looking at you, kid.
Re:Creepy as shit (Score:5, Funny)
This is going to be GRRRR-REAT!!! Now I can stare at my girlfriend's boobs the whole time and iOS will auto-correct, making it look like I'm actually paying attention to what she's saying! Hot diggity-giggity-giggity-jiggly boobs!
Apple: your cell phones are way overpriced and your walled garden sucks ass, but this may be your killer feature, yo!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Given that facial expressions are a major part of human communication they might as well also just start putting words into our mouths whilst they're at it.
If someone isn't making eye contact, then that tells you as much as anything they can say. I predict this will pose interesting ethical and related legal issues, particularly if they go further down this road. For example, what happens if someone ends up suffering guilt at a friends suicide because they didn't recognise their friend was feeling that way
Re: (Score:3)
"If someone isn't making eye contact, then that tells you as much as anything they can say. "
Indeed, that tells you, that they are making eye-contact with the eyes of your picture on their side and not the camera.
Eye contact (Score:2)
"If someone isn't making eye contact, then that tells you as much as anything they can say. "
Indeed, that tells you, that they are making eye-contact with the eyes of your picture on their side and not the camera.
Also, eye contact is an almost instinct/reflex behaviour.
- You are automatically searching for the eyes of your contact when trying to make eye contact and by instinct might be looking at the screen (where you see the other person's eye) instead of the camera (were you should be looking at to make eye contact).
- The other person will be automatically interpreting not seeing your eyes and my get wrong idea, unless they make a conscious efforts to keep in mind that you're speaking to the image, not the camera
Re: (Score:2)
"- The other person will be automatically interpreting not seeing your eyes and my get wrong idea, unless they make a conscious efforts to keep in mind that you're speaking to the image, not the camera (and realize that they are actually doing the same)"
As you saw, the original poster didn't get it at all, so everybody must be pissed, small wonder that almost nobody uses Video modes.
Perhaps this will fix that.
Re: (Score:2)
Thirty years too late (Score:5, Funny)
Peter Falk and Sammy Davis, Jr could've used this.
Re: (Score:2)
I want one that also (Score:2)
makes my eyes dewey and big like a Pug dog.
The Memoji special event basically proved it (Score:2)
But, it’s even more obvious now: Cellphone OSes have been pretty much feature-complete for at least the past five years. There’s basically nothing truly interesting they can think of to add to our phones - we’re in the age of minor tweaks and iteration.
Re: (Score:2)
True.
Reminds me of the landline where Bell used to own all the rotaries and then 3rd party phones, especially the "Princess," was not only attractive, it was expensive.
I lived through that as you probably did. Then in 1980, I bought this house and bought a landline that had two battery-operated wireless handsets with caller ID, phone finder, answering machine, and speakerphone for about 40 bucks.
Now, the landline is gone completely.
Smartphone's only next move, I predict, will be to drop prices.
Re: The Memoji special event basically proved it (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I could see a docking station to keyboard, mouse, and monitor.
Good call.
Failure of imagination (Score:2)
There’s basically nothing truly interesting they can think of to add to our phones - we’re in the age of minor tweaks and iteration.
If true then that is a failure of imagination on the part of Apple and Google and others. I can think of quite a lot of things that they can/should do with my phone that to date they haven't and I'm not talking about idiotic emoji nonsense. Here are just a few random ideas right off the top of my head and it's not like I sit around thinking about this crap all day. Maybe they are working on stuff like this or something even better but I don't think phones are anywhere near "feature complete".
1) An interf
Re: (Score:2)
iOS does this via Lightning. There are already battery packs that can report their state of charge to iOS - by Apple and Morpheus I believe.
And the USB host adapter allows a limited set of USB devices to be used - audio DACs, USB HID devices, etc.
Requires coo
Rather lame tech (Score:1)
Kind of false (Score:5, Interesting)
Eye contact is one of the number one ways of properly assessing someone accurately. For example in job interviews even if the interviewer and interviewee aren't aware of it (when observed via recordings by studies), candidates that use stronger eye contact consistently are more likely to get jobs than those that shy away from view, across basically all cultures around the world.
This is going to make basically everybody psychologically seem more confident even if that's not actually the case.
This could be good but it could also skew the truth, which usually ends up being bad.
More true than false, and a large improvement (Score:5, Insightful)
This could be good but it could also skew the truth
What it is correcting for though is a massive skewing of the truth today - If you are looking at someone on a screen, you are not looking into the camera so it kind of looks mostly like people are looking away, even though they really are looking into the eyes of the image they see.
As long as it's pretty much just correcting for you looking at the screen (and it seems like it is, as if you look very far off it will not correct), then it's actually creating far more truth around where everyone is looking than we have seen to date in every videoconference app.
What I would love to see in a desktop version of this is something that corrected your eyes based on where the video windows is placed on the screen and where you are looking at the screen. I've already seen rough demos on the phone of tracking where you gaze as going as an accessibility feature, and that works better than you would think. If they can track where you are looking at on a tiny screen they can certainly do it on a desktop (this did require some calibration though).
Parallax (Score:2)
Eye contact is one of the number one ways of properly assessing someone accurately.
Yes it is but the entire point of this tech is an acknowledgement that that you physically cannot maintain proper eye contact on a smartphone during a video call even if you want to. You can look at the camera or you can look at the person you are talking to but you cannot look at both at the same time because of parallax effects.
I'm reserving judgement on whether I think this tech is a good idea or not (leaning towards not) but I get why they are trying it. Personally I wish they would work on some other
Hope it's optional (Score:5, Insightful)
There are plenty of reasons not to maintain persistent eye contact (that is considered unpleasant, impolite or weird in plenty of cultures, and even here).
Aside from that, something about communication software faking any part of a person's image or voice (rather than trying to convey the maximum possible semblance of reality). Seems like that's best left for the snapchat.
Re: (Score:3)
It's optional, there is a toggle in Face-Time settings.
It's a weird but well meaning fake. It's adjusting for the fact that the camera isn't in the middle of your phone where you look.
If you're not looking near your phone at all, it wont try to "correct" where your eyes are looking.
So it's sort of faking reality, because in reality you are making eye contact with the person you're talking to but that's not what the camera sees.
But have to agree, it seems a little creepy all the same.
Another form of mis-information (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Obvious possibilities for mis-use.
Such as?
Re: (Score:2)
Such as?
People seeking to deceive another party, using this medium, could find it easier to gain trust where it is not warranted.
The road to deepfakes... (Score:1)
...starts with baby steps.
What's next? Auto-slimming filters so you look more like you think/wish you do? Hair addition to force those with follicle-free heads to better fit in with the jealous hairy-headed? Skin tone alteration to add/remove tans or lighten/darken melanin levels?
ARKit (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
On Android there are apps using Google's AR tools to measure stuff. You can measure up a room just by pointing the camera at the corners and tapping. You can measure objects too.
It's not as accurate as using a measuring tape or laser, but for a quick estimate it's great.
There are also apps that let you try stuff out in your home before you buy it. Used one to size up what TV I wanted for the living room. IKEA's app lets you place furniture.
Digital Belladonna (Score:3)
How about increasing the size of the pupil as well, to make it appear as if the other person is sexually interested in you? ...
Just to make it extra creepy
Re:Digital Belladonna (Score:4, Funny)
Uh, I’m hanging up now, mom.
Hmm... (Score:2)
How about increasing the size of the pupil as well, to make it appear as if the other person is sexually interested in you?
Actually for people with an Apple Watch, you would have a reference heart rate before the call and during so you could basically detect exactly that and enhance both the eyes and the redness of the face...
That seems like a very good idea in fact.
Re: (Score:2)
or maybe they'll look like anime characters or powerpuff girls
Video Converencieng Fogging (Score:2)
I want client software that makes me look attentive while I am really asleep at tedious video conferences.
Cannot be that hard. Just replay shots of the odd times that I am attentive.
Hard part is to interject knowing nods at appropriate places. That could be done by noting when other participants nod. (Might produce a bad effect if they are also using the same software though.)
Running out of new feature ideas? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Eyes are the window to the soul (Score:2)
Apple: FTFY
Misunderstanding what this is (Score:4, Informative)
This isn't something that makes it look like the person is always looking at you. It merely corrects for the difference in position between the camera and the screen so that a person looking at the screen seems to be looking at you.
I imagine the early versions will make everyone (Score:2)
look like Marty Feldman
Re: (Score:2)
A good beginning (Score:2)
I sincerely hope that they will develop that in a way, so that I can sleep while people are talking to me, or better, why not simulate the whole face, then I can go to bed.
Apple is boring AF (Score:2)
Apple has no less than two patents on technologies which let you hide the camera in the display. One of them is for a camera behind the display which peeks out between pixels, and the other one I know of distributes the sensing elements throughout the display, with microlenses on each element providing focus. A sufficiently high-resolution display could have multiple arrays of lenses at multiple focal lengths.
Instead, Apple is using software to give an approximation of this effect which will surely land squ