Mr. Kaz Kylheku claims that artifacts that never existed in reality may show up when images are magnified. If anybody believes that this is true, please show me examples. I believe they would be of interest to follow list members.
In a previous post I provided links to two newspaper articles, one from New York Times and another from Washington Post. Both considered the judge's decision declaring the image inadmissible bizarre. Major newspapers have legal experts which offer insights on legal precedents and established practices. It appears that this ruling stands as a unusual exception, at least for now. We encounter zooms of digital images on a regular basis. Physicians, science teachers, the TV weatherman and sports commentators show us zooms of regions of interest. We don't hear voices of concern about this practice. Digital images are re-sized much more often that people assume. Even programmers may not be aware of this. There is a great variety of both digital cameras and computer displays available commercially. The number of receptor cells of the camera and the number of dots on the output screen do not always match. Whenever they disagree, the image is automatically shrunk or stretched with pixels deleted, inserted and modified on each occasion. We don't encounter qualms about this technology. My conclusion is that most people don't believe that images can get badly distorted when enlarged. They simply haven't seen it happen with their own eyes. However, advances in artificial intelligence may change this situation. We already have software that add color to old black-and-white photographs. For this reason I would like anybody who can recall relevant examples to come up with the information. --- Another point I would like to raise is the fact that this was a homicide case. In a murder trial the defendant can testify as he wishes while those slain by him cannot appear in court. Details unearthed from video recordings sometimes speak on the speechless man's behalf. Judges must be careful when deciding whether something can be admitted as evidence or not. Where judges are elected, voters should consider whether a candidate understands technology, at least the kind which is now commonplace. There are cases other than homicide in which one side, being dead or severely injured, cannot testimony in court. Probably the most common of these are traffic accidents. As programmers we must keep in mind how much difference an accurate record can make. We also must be willing to be informative to consumers who need advice on the matter. EXPLAINER: Why Arbery slaying video will be 'star witness' https://apnews.com/article/ahmaud-arbery-texas-georgia-brunswick-bryan-049a19283bd203468e00aadfe72b5362