I read this article recently about a new algorithm at Google that takes their image search capabilities a huge leap forward by enabling visual recognition If you have ever tried to search for images on Google or any other search engine, you know of the huge variety that can come up as results From what I understand, this new algorithm can tell the difference say between a dog and a fish without having any text to reference (the way images are found today).
If you have ever seen some requests that go out for images, they can be pretty darn specific – such as “A picture of a moose in a field of purple flowers with mountains in the backdrop on a sunny day.” Type that into a search engine and see what comes up I can imagine the frustration involved in such searches One image came close on the first page, only no moose The article noted that the new search routine returned 83% less irrelevant images That is quite an improvement!
Once a computer can tell the difference between such things, you have to wonder where it will lead – robots with greater visual capabilities – perhaps even cameras that can warn you of compositional distractions like “Are you sure you want that twig poking in the frame?” or “Did you see that Coke can?” Imagine how it can simplify the laborious task of keywording if you can simply type “Red Trillium in bark” into your own database and have it find them without ever having to keyword the images.
It will be interesting to see how this develops.
I wish I could have seen this first hand it’s remarkable and I looking at a photo
beautiful image
This is a great news for all photo lovers.they can find more relevant pics.but this will definitely take some time to come out.
hey cool, this would be awesome technology to master! thanks for the info.
It will be interesting to see what Google will do.
I almost missed the photo because of the article – what a perfectly balanced plant!
Ron
I think photographers are largely to blame for lackluster search results since many do not adequately caption for stock, but I too would be glad to see more relevant returns even if it means going away from the current system.
Thanks for the info in the article anfd the lovely purple trillium. It’s a wonderful composition.
Red Trillium in Bark. Which came first, the Google search or the photo? 🙂
The info you shared was a combination of creepy and exciting. No turning back…guess we’ll see how they choose to use it. (I wouldn’t mind having my camera mention dust spots on the lens, though.)
It is hard to keep up with the changes over there at Google. Their search functions for images have steadily increased in their importance. Thanks for the article, very nice image too!
Gasp! A red trillium! How fortunate for you!
Thanks Thomas – yes, it can be a little scary! You have to wonder if one of these small things is the first step in machines taking over! 🙂 Guess I have watched Terminator too many times!
Cindy, Boyd – thanks. Boyd – correction made, thanks for the new link.
My old link is dead now at wordpress as I’ve moved my blog to http://boydgreenewildlifeart.com/blog.
I’ve been reading some on this subject from information Clint Watson sent me and it sounds really nice.
Great photo. Very beautifully crafted.
oooh i love those red trilliums, we dont see them this far north- beautiful image-
interesting post- i know for myself when i did many searches on moths to id them, i usually got pest contol sites, even when searching google images.. it’s a jungle out there : )
Hi Mark, this does sound quite wild and, arguably, a little bit scary. Thanks for sharing it. The Trillium image is beautiful – I like how you have managed contrast here.