“Arbitrary” limits
. . . and the problem of making a less-strict standard than TTG
-
1. What does “arbitrary” mean?
“Arbitrary” is a description of decisions that are made when there is no arbiter (rinairs is the arbiter for TTG-related issues).
• “Arbitrary” is generally defined as “based on random choice or personal whim rather than any reason.”
• An example of an arbitrary limit would be “Not one degree more nor one degree less, because I said so.”
-
2. What does that have to do with setting limits on manipulations?
Not having an arbiter to serve as a reference standard presents a big problem when setting limits.
TTG uses rinairs as its reference standard (“arbiter”) when setting limits.
But when there is no respected “reference standard” like rinairs to refer to for a particular manipulation, then any limits that are set will be arbitrary.
-
3. What’s an example of the problem?
Four prominent examples for which any limits will be arbitrary are:
• fokeh (faux bokeh)
• AI-generated content (AI-GC)
• post-exposure perspective correction (PEPC)
• the size of words or graphics overlaying an image
Unlike manipulations that rinairs allows, these four examples are not governed by any reference standard that can be invoked when setting limits.
-
4. So what are the options when making a “less strict” label for things like fokeh, AI-generated content, and post-exposure perspective correction?
There are two options. Neither is ideal:
1. Set an arbitrary limit —“Not one degree more nor one degree less, because I said so”
(in which case viewers won’t trust the “less strict” label, because they’ll know it’s based on an arbitrary limit)
2. Set no limits at all
(in which case viewers won’t trust trust the “less strict” label, because many of the labeled photos will be wildly untrustworthy).
“But I've got an idea for how to set partial limits!”
AI creep is an example of the challenge of setting limits
“Nothing about TTG is arbitrary”
Creating a less-strict standard than TTG