Enhanced Google image search.
-
F*cking hell. I am, quite literally, gobsmacked. I took a picture of Cerreg Cennen Castle that I took in 2000 and it correctly identified it, named it, and found me simmilar pictures of the castle as quickly as it took to upload. That is damn impressive stuff.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
Dragging from other webpage is producing better results - looks like it is considering metadata from that website too.
-
I just noticed that now we can drag and drop images into the google image search box[^] - where we use to type in the keywords- and it search for the same. :cool: :thumbsup:
naga jolokia Google found it just fine. Must be the meta data and/or exif data.
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
-
naga jolokia Google found it just fine. Must be the meta data and/or exif data.
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
When I gave it the castle, the exif was very limited: camera make and model, date and time, resolution. No GPS, no nothing - it was a very early digital which didn't have all those fancy features. It spotted it from the image... Mind you, I gave it a picture of a medlar fruit and it missed that completely, and it isn't too good at faces: I gave it one of the wife, and it came back with Arnie...I haven't told her.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
-
When I gave it the castle, the exif was very limited: camera make and model, date and time, resolution. No GPS, no nothing - it was a very early digital which didn't have all those fancy features. It spotted it from the image... Mind you, I gave it a picture of a medlar fruit and it missed that completely, and it isn't too good at faces: I gave it one of the wife, and it came back with Arnie...I haven't told her.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
OriginalGriff wrote:
It spotted it from the image...
Very interesting.
OriginalGriff wrote:
I gave it one of the wife, and it came back with Arnie
:laugh: :laugh: :thumbsup: [edit] the thumbs up was because I thought the joke was funny, not that I agreed your wife looks like Arnie. :-D
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
-
naga jolokia Google found it just fine. Must be the meta data and/or exif data.
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
It recognized my company logo from a jpg I have stashed. No exif at all in that file - it's been converted from one format to another several times over. Of course a company logo is probably child's play to recognize. My guess? They're using the Goggles code on the uploaded images.
-
When I gave it the castle, the exif was very limited: camera make and model, date and time, resolution. No GPS, no nothing - it was a very early digital which didn't have all those fancy features. It spotted it from the image... Mind you, I gave it a picture of a medlar fruit and it missed that completely, and it isn't too good at faces: I gave it one of the wife, and it came back with Arnie...I haven't told her.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
OriginalGriff wrote:
and it came back with Arnie
Unless, of course, well...you don't have any unexplained children running around, do you?
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Personal 3D projects Just Say No to Web 2 Point Blow
-
It recognized my company logo from a jpg I have stashed. No exif at all in that file - it's been converted from one format to another several times over. Of course a company logo is probably child's play to recognize. My guess? They're using the Goggles code on the uploaded images.
Vark111 wrote:
They're using the Goggles code on the uploaded images.
Interesting. If they have a similar image cached then they could do a comparison between the image pixels of the cached version and the uploaded image pixels and look for similarities. When I uploaded my image, it did take a while for it to return a result but damn if it wasn't the hottest chili pepper on earth.
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
-
I just noticed that now we can drag and drop images into the google image search box[^] - where we use to type in the keywords- and it search for the same. :cool: :thumbsup:
-
It's extemely accurate too, I just uploaded a picture of myself and it returned images of models.
-
I just noticed that now we can drag and drop images into the google image search box[^] - where we use to type in the keywords- and it search for the same. :cool: :thumbsup:
I just tried a picture of someone lying on top of one of the columns at the holocaust memorial in Berlin, which is showing on the Irish Times website at the minute (there doesn't appear to be any story linked to the picture). Google images couldn't recognize it, it did throw out a collection of black and white images with either stripes or square patterns on them. I also tried it with the jpg downloaded and named HolocaustMemorialBerlin.jpg with the same result.
Pete
