From: "Alan (Miburi-san) Wexelblat" <wex@media.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 06:20:39 PST
To: pmetzger@lehman.com
Subject: picture signatures
In-Reply-To: <199312150253.VAA25863@snark>
Message-ID: <9312151419.AA21637@media.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


As I noted in my original message, signatures on pictures are not intended
to prevent doctoring, but to show where the doctoring was done.  A signature
is indeed like an affidavat; it associates the reputation of the signatory
party with the picture and provides a back-trace of the flow of the bits and
sites of possible malfeasance.

The idea is that if I have a picture I think is good and true and honest I
want to be able to sign it in such a way that if it appears later in
doctored form I can prove that those picture bits are NOT mine.  If someone
wants to make an honest change to a photo (like cropping to fit on a printed
page), he has to sign that change.  It's protection for photographers,
essentially, and for editors.

This way when someone complains "Hey!  Cropping me out of that picture
totally changes its meaning!" I can show that the complainer was in fact in
the picture I took.

--Alan Wexelblat, Reality Hacker, Author, and Cyberspace Bard
Media Lab - Advanced Human Interface Group	wex@media.mit.edu
Voice: 617-258-9168 Page: 617-945-1842		an53607@anon.penet.fi
The belief that enhanced understanding will necessarily stir a nation to
action is one of mankind's oldest illusions.