“Seen” or “Simulated”?
-
1. What is this page about?
In any photo that was recorded in a P5 way, everything that the viewer sees in the final image was either “seen” by the camera’s recording surface during the exposure period or it was “simulated” later.
• “Seen vs. Simulated” explains how, if two images were made in different ways but the two images look identical, the “seen” one can qualify as TTG while the “simulated” one cannot qualify as TTG.
• “Seen vs Simulated” also reinforces why any addition of AI-GC, no matter how tiny the affected area, always disqualifies a photo from TTG.
-
2. TTG photographs can include only what was “seen”...
Most visual effects do NOT disqualify a photo from TTG if they were “seen” by the camera’s recording surface during the exposure period.
-
3. . . . and never what was “simulated”
A photo is disqualified by P2 if after the light hits the recording surface, the image is doctored or aigmented to simulate those exact same visual effects.
This disqualification applies even if the photo is doctored or aigmented instantly, during the recording, and it applies even if the simulated effect looks identical to what the camera “could have” recorded.
-
4. What does “Seen vs. Simulated” mean in the real world?
“Seen vs Simulated” explains the most common way that of two identical-looking images, one may qualify as TTG while the other does not qualify. Written examples of this
-
5. Is this a new thing?
Yes, “Seen vs. Simulated” is largely a 21st-century concern.
The matter of “viewers mistrusting simulated visual effects” was not of great concern in the film era, because the typical “film” photographer could not easily or convincingly perform most post-exposure simulations of visual effects that are possible now.
“TTG photos are always about what the camera lens saw, not what the photographer wishes the camera lens had seen.”