• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    10828 days ago

    Why do people censor fuck or other profanity on the internet? I don’t get it, and until now, I’ve been too afraid to ask.

    • Dyskolos
      link
      fedilink
      4228 days ago

      Murica. Dunno if any other country does censor such trivialities too. And to the deeper why: religious hipocrisy i guess.

      • Turun
        link
        fedilink
        25
        edit-2
        28 days ago

        Afaik tiktok also heavily censors topics that are considered bad publicity or whatever. In fact, considering that this self-censor trend (edit: this type of self censor trend that utilizes cutting out vowels instead of using euphemisms or not using the words at all) is much much younger than YouTube or Instagram (at least I noticed it only a few months, maybe one or two years ago) I’d say the American companies weren’t even the driving force behind it.

        • @LwL
          link
          1828 days ago

          Youtube has forced it onto their creators for a while. Censor swears or risk upsetting the almighty algorithm and getting demonetized, because apparently american companies don’t like being associated with swearing.

          • Turun
            link
            fedilink
            15
            edit-2
            28 days ago

            Yeah, but the YouTube culture used to not use swearwords/unwanted words as a result of this. I have recently seen a few videos, where they said prn and sx, including cutting the vowels from the audio. This change in how to deal with the restrictions imposed by the platform is what I don’t understand.

            Edit: I have edited my comment above to be more precise.

          • @SpunkyMcGoo
            link
            126 days ago

            with both tiktok and youtube, nobody actually knows if that’s the case, they just assume it

    • HEXN3T
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      1927 days ago

      Better yet: Why do such a pathetic job doing it?

    • @WereCat
      link
      527 days ago

      I don’t fucking k***.

    • @hakunawazo
      link
      327 days ago

      It’s like drinking with brown paper bag censoring. Everybody knows what’s going on and it’s pointless. So f*ck it. ;)

    • @NorthWestWind
      link
      -428 days ago

      Because not everyone is comfortable with swears

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3828 days ago

        Fuck the fucking fuckers. Swearing as much a part of human communication as cadence is.

        Puritans can fuck themselves with a pineapple. It’s as ridiculous as finding full stops offensive and insisting the rest of the world bow to them by using double commas or something.

      • Cethin
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2928 days ago

        Except no one sees the censored thing and doesn’t think the word itself. If anything the censor is bringing extra attention to it. It’s dumb. If the person posting is scared of the word, they should leave it out. If they’re worried other people might fear it then either they should leave it out or not bother censoring because they see it anyway.

      • Turun
        link
        fedilink
        1228 days ago

        I understand that and I prefer to not swear most of the time as well. But these “I’ll leave out the vowels” edits don’t change the number of swearwords in the sentence.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          5
          edit-2
          28 days ago

          “If you censor a vowel, the number of swearwords in the sentence remains the same.”
          - Batman

      • Norah - She/They
        link
        fedilink
        English
        6
        edit-2
        28 days ago

        Yeah and this puritanical bullshit sends us all tumbling down a slippery slope until it’s offensive to teach children anatomy words like penis and vagina. Hmm, and one wonders why practicing christian families have a higher instance of unreported CSA 🤔

  • @FinishingDutch
    link
    10228 days ago

    You CAN in fact more or less do this for real: photographing a mirror from a straight on perspective without the camera visible.

    https://youtu.be/ZlaeWRMYwGg?feature=shared

    Basically, you need a special tilt-shift lens that distorts perspective to where it looks ‘straight on’ while the camera is actually off to the side or down below. If you do it correctly, the viewer won’t even notice anything’s missing.

    These lenses are primarily used for architecture photography to prevent ‘leaning buildings’. They can also create really cool miniature effects. It’s quite a useful bit of gear, but also rather expensive because it’s such a niche lens.

    • genuineparts
      link
      fedilink
      21
      edit-2
      28 days ago

      If someone is like me and goes: “Want!”: That Lens in the video costs a cool ~1000 Bucks.

      Which doesn’t mean I don’t want it anymore… Just that it’s on the list for when I swim in money for some reason :D

      • @FinishingDutch
        link
        1428 days ago

        The one in the video is a Canon TS-E 90 - that’s a 1000 bucks USED. And that’s not really what you want if you’re going to be doing landscape stuff. You want the TS-E 24 for a much wider field of view. Those are even more expensive.

        You CAN however buy cheaper, new lenses. Brands like Laowa and Samyang produce tilt-shifts that cost less than half of what a Canon costs if you really want a new example.

        That said though… anything in photography is expensive anyway, and these are niche lenses. They do some things that other lenses really can’t, like this magic trick. And while you can replicate some of its effect digitally - like the miniature effect - the best way to do things like that is always in camera. If you take a good shot to start with, you’ll alsways have a better end result.

        I’m personally looking to buy a TS-E 24 one of these days, assuming I find a gently used - and gently priced - example.

        • @umbraroze
          link
          127 days ago

          I was like, ooh, I didn’t know there were newer Nikon tilt-shift lenses (Nikkor PC-E) for the F mount that are still available for purchase new… …and the bloody things cost like 1900€. Even the older PC-Nikkor lenses cost a pretty penny in second hand market.

          These lenses are firmly in “would be extremely neat to have, but are both on the very expensive side and also I don’t know how much use I’d get from them in practice” category of photography gear. …which doesn’t narrow much down if we’re talking photography gear, but hey.

          • @FinishingDutch
            link
            226 days ago

            The best strategy when it comes to expensive niche lenses like this is: save up and buy a good used example of a lens that won’t limit you and will let you grow as a photographer. There’s always people selling gently used lenses because they either don’t use them or they’re switching systems.

            I’ve always bought better lenses and gear than I needed at the time and never regretted it. If you buy a cheap lens, it often comes with tradeoffs that the expensive lenses don’t have. If you buy a good lens - especially dumb, manual lenses like a tilt-shift, you can always use them on other cameras down the line or sell them to another eager photographer without losing a lot of money.

            Owning niche gear like this is kind of its own joy anyway. It’ll let you do and experiment with things that others can’t do. You might not use it every day, but you’ll be ticked pink to use it when you can. I can’t really tell you what I paid for some of my specialty gear, but I can damn sure tell you about how much I smile when I use it :D

    • @humorlessrepost
      link
      English
      3
      edit-2
      28 days ago

      cool miniature effects

      My favorite example is the intro to Dollhouse. Now I need to rewatch that show.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      127 days ago

      Also, you can use a telephoto lens, like from that little bush you can see in the center if you zoom in (not that anybody sensible would bother)

  • Lux
    link
    fedilink
    7428 days ago

    The reflection doesn’t match what’s in front of the mirror, so they probably just edited in a different picture

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1028 days ago

      You’re probably correct, this reflection definitely looks odd. But something to consider is that the mirror is likely leaning back, and depending on your angle to it it may not show you whats directly in front of it but show things further out in way that could explain the weirdness.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        2728 days ago

        Look at the path. It goes directly to the base of the mirror from the ‘other’ side, but you can’t see it at all on ‘this’ side. You’re not telling me that’s not edited. Even if there’s some optical illusion shit going on and the mirror is actually leaning back much more than it appears, this would still imply that the path goes directly towards some random wall and then just ends, or at least makes a very sharp turn, at most 0.5 meter in front of it? Why would it do that?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          20
          edit-2
          28 days ago

          Also look at the mismatch between the lovely country looking cottage and the rusty corrugated fence. I’m betting it was edited because whatever was in the reflection didn’t look very nice and would’ve made the mirror look awful.

          You could say it would… reflect badly on the mirror.

          Ahem.

    • @seaQueue
      link
      528 days ago

      Or it’s an undisclosed AI generated image, that seems more likely to me than any other source

    • @[email protected]
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      428 days ago

      At first, I thought it was a painting. Everything is warped and blurred just a little bit. Almost impressionist like.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    21
    edit-2
    28 days ago

    Party pooper train coming through - chooo chooo

    Notice the path in the mirror does not match up with the ground - no path below the mirror

    • capital
      link
      927 days ago

      lol I knew the thread before clicking.

      I hate that they ruined my favorite website.

  • key
    link
    fedilink
    English
    728 days ago

    It says in the image, it’s a fae portal not a mirror.

  • JackbyDev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    126 days ago

    There’s something about using the same sort of lenses that allow tilt shift. You just shift the lense to the side. Idk how to explain because I only sort of understand it and am not a photographer.

  • @AgentGrimstone
    link
    126 days ago

    It’s very easy to do this in Photoshop now. Literally two clicks.

    • @yokonzo
      cake
      OP
      link
      English
      226 days ago

      True but I think I remember seeing this photo around 2013 or so. Granted I could do this in Photoshop back then as well, but I worth mentioning

  • TWeaK
    link
    fedilink
    English
    128 days ago

    Waiting for the subsequent photos ala the reddit one, where the guy kept taking more pictures of himself taking pictures.

    However this one was maybe just done from far away, my guess.

  • @ParabolicMotion
    link
    126 days ago

    Someone just threw on an adaptive tech suit before taking this picture. No big deal, right?