Skip navigation

Face detection

Jan 9, 2012 11:32 PM

Tags: #lightroom #lightroom_4 #wanted #face_detection #wanted_features
  Latest reply: HawooDiablo, Mar 2, 2012 9:29 AM
Replies 1 2 3 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 12, 2012 1:35 PM   in reply to TomIron

    I'm voting yes! Good time to adopt this and introduce this to the pros, too. Others have lead the way in opening eyes to see the benefits but now we need a serious tool to implement it and secure it for years to come. My objective is to document the past, old photos, for generations to come and people data is something that easily gets lost if it's not an integral part of the media, in the metadata.

     

    Right now, I'm scanning tons of old slides. It's a slow process, and I have had to think carefully each step of the workflow. It was good to see geotagging the way it is in LR4, but I have no rush in post processing these slides until I have a solution where I can add both the geolocation and the face tags at the same time. The same applies to all those existing images in my catalogue - I'd better wait with the geotagging until I have the face tagging available too.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 13, 2012 7:09 PM   in reply to TomIron

    I'm Still testing the Book Module (crashed on Mac when I've opened it without any photo).

     

    Bud since we now have Books And Maps, Why not a Face module, right?

     

     

    Anyway, Still Testing.... For Science ^^

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 14, 2012 9:08 AM   in reply to TomIron

    Face detection? I'd rather have efforts put into image quality, removal of phenomenae like purple fringing, good colors, dynamic range, a useful clone tool etc. etc.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 14, 2012 9:30 AM   in reply to TomIron

    TomIron wrote:

     

    What about face detection - this much wanted feature? It's been there for quite a while in PS Elements...

    It's not wanted by me...

     

    I'm with you 100% Emile - let's keep gimmicks for the likes of Picasa.

     

    It creases me up to read that FR is "essential" to so many people: what were they doing two years ago?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 14, 2012 11:48 AM   in reply to Keith_Reeder

    It´s not essential.

     

    Lightroom (and photoshop too) have a lot of features and no one really uses every single tool in there.

    Give FD for those who want or need this to organize their photos. Just like Geotag.

     

    Calling that a Gimmick, so LR NEVER should have Maps, Slideshow, Web, Book...

     

    And if speed is essential, why a Print and Library module to take away my precious speed? LR is "just" a skin to the Camera Raw code anywais.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 14, 2012 2:38 PM   in reply to Felipe Arruda

    Face detection as implemented by other applications I've used (iphoto and aperture) doesn't work accurately enough, even for family photos (maybe especially for family photos as the faces both change over time and have a lot of facial similarities - it has a lot of trouble distinguishing between my kids and their cousins!). Unless Adobe could produce a version that actually works, I'd say don't bother. A sufficiently accurate face detection system could be useful. But at the moment rigorous keywording is the best way to go in just about any application..

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 14, 2012 3:51 PM   in reply to Keith_Reeder

    Keith_Reeder wrote:

     

    TomIron wrote:

     

    What about face detection - this much wanted feature? It's been there for quite a while in PS Elements...

    It's not wanted by me...

     

    I'm with you 100% Emile - let's keep gimmicks for the likes of Picasa.

     

    It creases me up to read that FR is "essential" to so many people: what were they doing two years ago?

     

    Doing what I'm still doing now, which is spending a whole lot of time in labeling captions on each photo, denoting the position of people within the photo, in addition to standard keywords. 

     

    It's embarassing that a professional DAM solution in 2012 cannot at the very least allow for keyword tagging of specific regions in an image.  Facial detection and recognition is just the logical automatic extension of that.  But it's typcal for "professionals" to shun automatic tools. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 15, 2012 10:47 AM   in reply to asefawefwef

    The Apple functionality of Faces is a lifesaver. Originally it comes across as a cute gimmick but in fact it safes hours and hours when trying to apply keywords. It is not just about doing it to existing large libraries, but also to avoid having to tag every photograph manually on import. I use it systematically after every large import and it has an impressive hit rate. It is also highly convenient as it detects faces and then ask you for the untagged ones. I was disappointed when I saw that LR4B had geo-tagging but not faces. The latter is much more relevant for me.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 16, 2012 9:12 AM   in reply to asefawefwef

    I agree

    here is a feature request you can vote for:

     

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/add_possibility_ to_tag_a_specific_region_of_a_picture

     

    this is the first step to face tagging, focus point,...

    then we can have auto face tagging of course.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 16, 2012 9:20 AM   in reply to Susan S.

    Depends how you use it you will find tons of people that love the way it works in Picasa iphoto,...

    For sure it won't detect everything but it is really a time saver.

    PICASA perfectly detects me as a baby as well as an adult, so the way it is implemented also count. And it learns: at first I had a lot of error mixing up family memeber but after a short period of time error were quite rare. Anyway nothing is automatic, you always get to confirm or correct the choice. So even if wrong it still has 2 advantages : it highlight the face for me so I do not have to do it myself. THe final tagged person is not only a keyword, but a keyword linked to a face in the photo. That way when I look at shool photos 20 years old I do not wonder who is sitting near me, or where and who is this john I wrote the name 20 years ago at the back of the photo.

     

    regars

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 16, 2012 9:49 AM   in reply to s_christe

    Would you rather have a feature rich application like aperture which gives poor output in 80% of the crud it passes off as innovative or something like LR which adopts new features slowly but perfects then quickly.  Let's take adjustment brushes, noise and sharpen for instance probably the most important features of any RAW workflow..  These features are simply embarrassing in anything else.  And people mentioning iphoto - well i guess too many hobbyists can spoil the broth, the same as half baked features can spoil the software.

     

    All the above except for tethering... That's just inconsistent crap in LR

     

    And Lyons, you're a big fat liar!

     

    "I have no idea if that will change in the final version."

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 16, 2012 10:02 AM   in reply to Simon Full

    Simon, this is off topic: obviously I prefer LR for RAW workflow (although before the 2010 process Aperture was better IMO), the question is about LR joining the rest of the world in adding useful features to an otherwise excellent tool. Adjustment brushes have nothing to do with it!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 16, 2012 10:07 AM   in reply to Moscool

    The essence of my message has everything to do with the topic but I wholeheartedly apologize if English isn't your first language...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 16, 2012 11:54 AM   in reply to Moscool

    Keep it civil or we'll close the topic.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 17, 2012 5:04 AM   in reply to TomIron

    Is it going to make it in LR4? No idea but here is an interesting interview with Tom Hogarty on Dpreview

     

     

    One feature that some users had hoped to see in Lightroom 4 is face recognition, in which the software identifies specific faces in images and embeds this information as metadata for easier image searches. Hogarty says that when allocating resources for a new release, highest priority is given to features that benefit the greatest number of users. 'Face recognition is very important to some', he says, 'but irrelevant to others, leading to [internal] debates about what solutions are tackled in a release cycle.' Perhaps even more important, he notes there are serious privacy concerns about, 'the ability of software solutions to collect person-specific information.' He says that the challenges in implementing a face recognition workflow in Lightroom involve: 'privacy controls, integration with third party solutions like Facebook, tolerance for false positives - and the effort required to correct them - as well as the time required [by the user] to teach recognition tools.'

     

     

    So instead of having a full featured face recognition couldn't we have at least
    -Region Tagging
    -face detection (detect faces but not who does the face belong to)

     

    This would at first greatly help the tagging process, with little recognition errors (less than trying to recognise who is who) and no privacy issue as the software does not automatically recognise people, just make it simpler for people to catalog photos with people on them (which photograph already do, today, anyway)
    Regards
    Eric

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 17, 2012 7:01 AM   in reply to TomIron

    I'd love to see face recognition in LR. Personally, I don't need anything especially complex to use: all I want is for LR to automatically tag each photo with the names of the individuals present in the photo so I can then search my photos for individuals. In terms of privacy, I'd be completely happy with an option to prevent these names from appeariing in the metadata for exported images.

     

    I've been holding off on purchasing LR3 because I hoped that LR4 would have face recognition.  If the release version of LR4 doesn't have face detection then I'm very likely to look for an alternative software solution which would be a great shame because I love Adobe's digital photography tools.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 17, 2012 7:16 AM   in reply to Babar_e

    Well, interesting to hear this internal things, Babar_e. But also sad, as I really hoped to see FR. As somebody else stated, the privacy issue is no issue to me: Now I do it manually, which is the same amount of information in the metadata but much much more work. Even a FR with say 90% accuracy would reduce my work by 90% (ok +- false positives and so on but hey, also 8% is nice). I think this thread also shows that at least a big share of the people DO want face recognition. And really, Adobe, cannot  be  worried about privacy that much, PSE now cannot only tag faces on photos automatically, but also talks to facebook. So, LR would be on a MUCH safer side...

     


    best


    Michael

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 17, 2012 7:35 AM   in reply to Michael_from_Muenster

    Agreed, the privacy concern/(excuse) doesn't fly with me either as it didn't for Apple, Google or Facebook.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 17, 2012 7:46 AM   in reply to bwl21

    Use Picasa and http://www.anvo-it.de/wiki/doku.php?id=avpicfacexmptagger:main

    works better than Jeffrey plugin for me.

    The only draw back is that PICASA may alter your metadata.

    my work around to be on the safe side is to use Picasa with a copy of my photos and then synchronise the .ini files that picasa creates and that contains the faces information with the folder where I store my working copies of photos . from there I then use avpicfacexmptagger to tag the face in my working copies of the photos

    next daw back -> I get the proper keyword in Lr but not the associated image region, that I can only visualise in avpicfacexmptagger, geosetter, or windows live gallery.

    Actually I stopped doing it to long for me I hopped PSE 10 would help but not it does not store the region data in the XMP (same for PICASA) so it is useless to me

    I hope LR 4 (or 5) will get it better, and at least I hope LR4 can read/write image region

     

    regards

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 17, 2012 7:51 AM   in reply to Simon Full

    The thing is people always tagged (up to know using keyword only and not image region+keyword) people in photos and it won't stop. Auto tagging is just a tool.

    It is like with knife

    should we forbide knife because they can be used to kill

       well no . This would be annoying for people that use them to cook, and people that may use them to kill will just use something else.

    Should we avoid automatic face detection in LR

       well I do not think so, this will keep "annoying" people that want to use it as a cataloging tool, this will not stop people that want to tag you on the web, as they will use other tools such as facebook, picasa, google+,...

    regards

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 17, 2012 8:26 AM   in reply to TomIron

    Yeah I don't really understand why privacy would be a concern here. It only becomes a (to most people minor even though I feel iffy about it) concern when you post images indiscriminately on social websites. Those automatically tag your images anyway! Face detection would be nice to have. Would save me a lot of work.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 17, 2012 9:33 AM   in reply to Jao vdL

    You just have to think a bit more widely to see why privacy is a concern. It need not kill the idea of adding FR, but allowing strong privacy settings needs to be an integral part of the feature.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 17, 2012 2:39 PM   in reply to johnbeardy

    Hi john

    I agree with you, privacy settings need to be part of the feature. But I would not call it strong: an option not to export the face metadata.

    I do not see what else could be done.

    A LR user is in control of what he does: if he tags faces, it is his choice so he has no concern about it. And as long as it stays on his computer no one else need to be concerned about it.

    If he took a photo of you 2 solution:

    -he knows you and can add your name on the face

    -he does not know you , he won't be able to tag you name and even an automatic tagging algorithm won't be able to recognize you, so no problem.

     

    If he decides to put the photos on internet, it is his responsability to respect your privacy, not LR. Even if LR has no face tagging feature, if he decides to publish the photo with tagged face, he will be able to do it manually or use alternative such as the services offered by the websites where the photo are stored (most of them have now this option automated ->facebook picasa google +,..., it is as easy as doing it directly in lr - you just won't be able to use it for cataloging)

     

    that explain why maybe many people do not think that adding this feature will raise anymore privacy concern than there already are. It may even lower those concerns if the feature is bundle with the export option. Indeed without such option today, keywords all get exported. There is no difference between a keyword representing a person name and a keyword of a different nature.

     

    I am afraid the best solution is to educate people

     

    regards

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 18, 2012 1:59 PM   in reply to jasonwarth

    Okay, I shall call you paranoid.  No one is saying you have to use the feature, but I would like to have the feature.  I, as a pro photographer who shoots weddings, and other things, think this is a great feature.  To me it is more important than GPS.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 19, 2012 3:06 AM   in reply to TomIron

    I really don't think that privacy issues is what's holding back Adobe. I would think that implementation is. Some basic problems to consider are dealing with virtual copies (do you always assign region tags to the original file, or also to virtual copies), crop and rotate (region tagging is only stable as long as you don't rotate, or morph picture, etc. Anyone knows how this is handled in Aperture?

    The easy solution would be to do region tagging on the unmodified file only, and then calculate it from there. But I can see that this would be a major interference with the current workflow, and probably architecture.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 19, 2012 3:59 AM   in reply to grovel

    Sorry, I dont think implementation can problematic as you describe it or would be a major interference with the current workflow. All the rotation, cropping and so on is just a mathematical operation. Inverting these and applying to a piece of metadata (e.g. pixel coordinates of a face) is easy. Even if you tag a cropped or rotated virtual copy one could easily add the tag to the source pics at the right position. So, that should not stop fairly able programmers (and I think with LR they showed they can handle much more complicated things..) from doing it. And from the UI side: A simple tagbox asking wether to copy facetags to all virtual copies /master pics somewhere in the settings menu would do.

     

    best

     

    Michael

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 19, 2012 4:12 AM   in reply to Michael_from_Muenster

    I agree this is fairly simple to overcome, moreover, adobe already has the technology to overcome this : local adjustment are region tagged for image rendering, and it works , whether you rotate crop or even distort your photo with lens aberration correction.

    regards

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 19, 2012 4:21 AM   in reply to Babar_e

    @babar_e Education goes so far, but you don't hand people a loaded gun. So the least I'd seek in a "strong" privacy setting is that each person should have a "do not export personal metadata" box, with "no" being the default, and a further override in all the export areas so that at that point in time the user can prevent the metadata being written to the file even where that person was marked to export.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 19, 2012 5:00 AM   in reply to johnbeardy

    Good idea, did not think of the first one, though it is similar to private location in the new map module.

    And I am all for it

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 19, 2012 5:30 AM   in reply to Babar_e

    Babar_e wrote:

     

    Good idea, did not think of the first one, though it is similar to private location in the new map module.

    And I am all for it

    Yes, and to the similar setting in keywords. The only thing is, I'd want to select multiple people and change the export setting - not have to do them one by one as one still does with keywords.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 21, 2012 7:39 AM   in reply to TomIron

    a few more quick thoughts:

     

    Firstly, Adobe, if you want to implement face recognition quickly then I'd suggest forgetting about region tagging for now. All I care about is that each image includes meta data which describes who's in the photo.  I don't need metadata which describes *where* each individual is within the frame.

     

    Secondly, to anyone who's worried about privacy but still wants to use face recognition: a simple solution is just to use obfuscated or code names.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 21, 2012 7:46 AM   in reply to dan_aka_jack

    I fully agree with this!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 21, 2012 11:47 AM   in reply to bwl21

    I disagree totally,

    that is the all point of face tagging, otherwise when exporting photos you loose everything. That is exactly why I do not use PSE10 or Picasa. Everything is locked in the software.

    More over the region tagging process is the easiest thing to integrate. Wouldn't take more than a few hours ( and its generous - I would say minutes) to implement it - it is just a problem of writting the region data in the xmp. Do not forget that the region is already computed, it is part of the process to recognise the faces.

    So your request sounds like you are asking someone to do 99.9% of a job and throw to the rubbish 40% of the job that won't work because of those 0.1% not done.

    regards

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • LuxMirabilis
    40 posts
    Jun 8, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 21, 2012 12:04 PM   in reply to TomIron

    Lr is for me a professional photo editing program. Let's keep it focused on what it does and leave the doodads to some other casual app.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 21, 2012 12:08 PM   in reply to LuxMirabilis

    1- Many professional request for it as well, easy to check on this forum. Among them many are wedding photographers

    2- according to a recent survey on Lightroom queen blog more than 50 percent of the users are not professionals.

     

    regards

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • LuxMirabilis
    40 posts
    Jun 8, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 21, 2012 12:15 PM   in reply to Babar_e

    Babar_e wrote:

     

    1- Many professional request for it as well, easy to check on this forum. Among them many are wedding photographers

    2- according to a recent survey on Lightroom queen blog more than 50 percent of the users are not professionals.

     

    regards

     

    By 'professional' I mean professional-grade. Featuritis is usually the killing disease of great tools. Wedding professionals can already use metadata to assign people to photos. I fail to see how face-detection is so important in wedding photography, unless they sell the photos along with Lr for the feature to be of use for the end-user (customer).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 21, 2012 5:37 PM   in reply to LuxMirabilis

    Here is an example of face detection being very important: Client asks a wedding photographer who shot 6000 images at a wedding: "I want a print of a picture of Uncle Jim. Can you show me all the images you have of him? Oh, and is there one of him and my niece together?"

     

    Using metadata currently isn't an alternative since 1) it all needs to be entered manually, which is extremely time consuming, not to mention tedious and in light of the fact that automated technology is available, unnecessary 2) it is kind of strange if you don't know the names of the people (I can imagine it being a bit embarassing if you have to name your people keywords "that bald guy in the red sweater" and you then showing your client the images inside LR or even accidentally exporting the keyword to a file that gets delivered) and 3) the data should theoretically go into the "Person Shown" field, which Lightroom only displays and stores, but there is no built-in way to search for data inside it, so features like keywords or collections would have to be abused, thus the solution would not really be future proof. There is also a bug in Adobe Bridge CS5 that causes the IPTC extension fields not to show up in the metadata panel, which could be a workflow issue.

     

    The point is that automated face tagging saves an incredible amount of time for anyone who needs to be able or occasionally want to search their images by the people in them often, be it professionals or hobbyists.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2012 12:10 AM   in reply to peter/w

    p_werner wrote:

    "the data should theoretically go into the "Person Shown" field, which Lightroom only displays and stores, but there is no built-in way to search for data inside it,"

    I am not sure I am reading your remarks correctly here, but Lightroom will search for any text in the metadata fields.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2012 12:40 AM   in reply to Harry Limey

    I still can't believe people are complaining that this is an unprofessional gadget. It's one more way to sort and present data, it's a highly useful feature. It's not just "a professional photo editing program", that's Photoshop+Camera Raw. It's a tool to organise a mass of data into easily searchable bits.

    As a press photographer for a small newspaper, I do want, and do need to organise my pictures by who's on it. And no, simply tagging them is not enough. As a result, I currently (also) keep all my pictures in Picasa, whose face tagging is excellent, and extremely useful. It's just a nightmare to backup and you never know when you lose your data. Which is why I want it in Lightroom.

    Lightroom is really not at the forefront when it comes to organising pictures, I would want to see this changed.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2012 2:02 AM   in reply to Harry Limey

    Harry Limey wrote:

     

    I am not sure I am reading your remarks correctly here, but Lightroom will search for any text in the metadata fields.

    Sorry, I should have been more clear. Without plugins, Lightroom will in fact search/filter/smart collection those fields, but only as part of the "Any searchable Text/Metadata" option. So if you want to search for, say, "Amber" inside Person Shown, you'll not only find pictures of that person, but also completely unrelated pictures that have a similar keyword applied (which will bring up images of Amber's wedding, images of jewellery, anything with amber color etc.) or as a filename (img1234_toned_amber_002a.tif). The field is also not supported in the metadata brush, and the way auto completion works for the field is pretty much useless and counter productive and makes it even more inefficient to use.

     

    But the point is, it requires clumsy manual entry of all the metadata and that is extremely time consuming compared to a partly automated solution. For people like press photographers, making people tagging more efficient can make a major difference in terms of how quickly they are able to deliver their images and thus how likely their pictures are to run.

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 3 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (2)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points