Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Real-Time Face Substitution in Javascript

Unknown Lamer posted about 6 months ago | from the ever-growing-mask dept.

Programming 63

An anonymous reader writes with news of an interesting demo for clmtrackr (a Javascript library for tracking of facial features) that hides your face using 3D masks overlayed on the video from your webcam using WebGL. The effect is kind of neat, and a bit creepy. The demo works in Chromium here, but not in Firefox (Debian unstable). There are a couple other demos; the facial deformation demo is reminiscent of the intro screen to Mario 64.

cancel ×

63 comments

Real time ass fucking in Javascript (1, Troll)

slashdot sucks cock (3492225) | about 6 months ago | (#45907911)

Slashdot is the worst site on the internet.

Re:Real time ass fucking in Javascript (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45911717)

"Lol ur website is bad and u should feel bad!!~" - Really? Don't worry, I'm not mad or anything, just bemused at the lack of innovation in trolls. It was entertaining when the idea of baiting forums was new (yeah, we've all been there), but now it's just old hat. We know the dialogue of all the actors in every scene as it unfolds and the drama is still cherished, but like a playwright who bows long after the audience has ceased clapping, this kind of trolling is past its time. I'm sort of surprised that the internet hasn't collectively moved on already.

the original facial deformation demo (5, Funny)

nimbius (983462) | about 6 months ago | (#45907969)

JQuery.

Javascript blocked by default. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45907989)

Sorry, can't see. Do it server side, or not at all.

Re: Javascript blocked by default. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45908061)

I'm sure the Internet will get right on it to please your whims. Should we send all further correspondences to your mom's basement per usual?

Re:Javascript blocked by default. (1)

bcmm (768152) | about 6 months ago | (#45908543)

Do real-time video processing server-side? Seriously?

Re:Javascript blocked by default. (0)

tepples (727027) | about 6 months ago | (#45908839)

OnLive and Gaikai manage to do it.

Re:Javascript blocked by default. (1)

master5o1 (1068594) | about 6 months ago | (#45910769)

Do they require you to run some code on your machine?

If yes, then it's just the same as if it was Javascript.

Re:Javascript blocked by default. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45908617)

It's a demonstration of a Javascript library, you moron. What's the point of doing it server-side, it wouldn't be good demonstration then.

Node.js (0)

tepples (727027) | about 6 months ago | (#45908863)

Then do it server-side in Node.js.

Re:Node.js (1)

royallthefourth (1564389) | about 6 months ago | (#45909065)

How will you take a picture and send it to the server without JS in the browser? Not to mention how much bandwidth that would use...

Re:Node.js (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 6 months ago | (#45909923)

He wants you to use Flash.

input type="file" (1)

tepples (727027) | about 6 months ago | (#45910253)

How will you take a picture and send it to the server without JS in the browser?

Take a picture with a digital camera or a webcam and save it to a JPEG file. Then upload it through a form with <input type="file">.

Re:input type="file" (1)

omnichad (1198475) | about 6 months ago | (#45910383)

30 times per second. This works with live video.

Re: Javascript blocked by default. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45910477)

Don't feed the troll.

Clicks vs. drags (1)

tepples (727027) | about 6 months ago | (#45908887)

So how should the browser send a drag event to the server? The only pointer events I know of that can be sent to the server without JavaScript are click events on server-side image maps, not drag events. How, for example, would you make a browser-based paint program without JS?

Re:Clicks vs. drags (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 months ago | (#45909261)

I think the simple answer is, why do you need a browser based paint program? Because you can is a good reason, but are there any other reasons. You could just as easily build a pain program using more traditional methods, and if you need to communicate with a server, you can just send stuff to the server, using HTTP if you like. There's very little reason to actually have the program running in the browser.

Re:Clicks vs. drags (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45909769)

Because users don't want to install a program.

Re:Clicks vs. drags (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 months ago | (#45910007)

Who has to "install" a program. You can download an EXE and run it without installing it. This part of the reason that Google Chrome got so popular so fast. You didn't have to install anything. It didn't require administrator access. Very few machines are locked down so much that you can't run arbitrary EXEs. Just about any system I've ever used would let you run whichever executable you wanted. Now, if you wanted to write files outside your home directory, or open up listening ports, that's a whole other story, but I don't think I've ever used a system where an arbitrary exe (not counting specific viruses) weren't allowed to run.

EXEs don't run on non-Windows machines (1)

tepples (727027) | about 6 months ago | (#45910203)

You can download an EXE and run it without installing it. [...] Very few machines are locked down so much that you can't run arbitrary EXEs. [...] I don't think I've ever used a system where an arbitrary exe (not counting specific viruses) weren't allowed to run.

You can't download and run an EXE on OS X, X11/Linux, Android, iOS, Windows RT, Windows Phone, Xbox, PlayStation Vita, PlayStation 3, PlayStation 4, Nintendo 3DS, or Wii U. Well you can run some EXEs on X11/Linux if you use Wine, as I do on my Xubuntu laptop, but that's an edge case. Besides, even on (recent) Windows, the operating system's SmartScreen feature will warn the user and encourage the user to delete an EXE if the EXE is "not commonly downloaded".

Re:EXEs don't run on non-Windows machines (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 months ago | (#45915783)

Well, it may not have an EXE extension, but in Linux and OSX, you can surely download a file, set the executable bit, and execute the program. There might be Linux and OSX configurations where the user does not have the right to set the executable bit, but again, it's not the norm. IOS, Android, and WinRT all allow programs to be download and run from the appropriate app store, and I can't see why you wouldn't want to just put an app on the apps store but would rather try to coerce a browser to do something it wasn't really meant to do in the first place. Consoles and games systems are much less easy to get your foot in the door in terms of development, but that's hardly a reason to develop a paint program in a browser.

Would still need to be ported; review guidelines (1)

tepples (727027) | about 6 months ago | (#45917191)

Well, it may not have an EXE extension, but in Linux and OSX, you can surely download a file, set the executable bit, and execute the program.

By "EXE" I did not intend to refer to a particular filename suffix. I intended to refer to an executable program in COFF/PE format that uses Windows APIs. An EXE won't run in Linux or OS X. Instead, the application would have to be ported to Linux and ported to OS X.

IOS, Android, and WinRT all allow programs to be download and run from the appropriate app store

Apple has a laundry list of application behaviors that it refuses to approve for distribution through its App Store [pineight.com] . So does Microsoft. And besides, even if the application does not include one of the forbidden features, the Windows application has to be ported to iOS, ported to Android, ported to Windows RT, and ported to Windows Phone.

I can't see why you wouldn't want to just put an app on the apps store but would rather try to coerce a browser to do something it wasn't really meant to do in the first place.

The fact that the app does one of the things on the blacklist, perhaps?

Consoles and games systems are much less easy to get your foot in the door in terms of development, but that's hardly a reason to develop a paint program in a browser.

If not in a browser, then in what else?

Re:Clicks vs. drags (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45914619)

Very few machines are locked down so much that you can't run arbitrary EXEs. Just about any system I've ever used would let you run whichever executable you wanted.

Forgive me if I don't understand why this wouldn't be a huge security risk?

Re:Clicks vs. drags (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 months ago | (#45916039)

I don't know, but as far as I've seen, putting scripting abilities, and other programming provisions, in browsers has lead to way more security problems than allowing people to run arbitrary executables. At least when I run arbitrary executables I get to decide which ones to run. They are downloaded to my computer, which can then run virus scans on them. Compare that to browser run code, where a small hole in the sandbox can lead to a users computer running all sorts of things, just from visiting a webpage.

Re:Javascript blocked by default. (3)

davester666 (731373) | about 6 months ago | (#45909435)

serverside is too late. you DON'T want the server to get your "real" face. the business owning the server has no interest in spending buckets of cash to capture images of your real face, only to screw them up so you can have your precious privacy.

Re:Javascript blocked by default. (3, Funny)

OakDragon (885217) | about 6 months ago | (#45909533)

Sorry, got GIFs blocked too. Gimme animated ASCII, or not at all.

Umm... (1, Flamebait)

Desler (1608317) | about 6 months ago | (#45908051)

So doing something in Javascript is a front page story? Is the language that crappy that being able to do mundane things with it is now news?

Re:Umm... (1)

Georules (655379) | about 6 months ago | (#45908425)

"in Javascript" is a classic headline decorator at Slashdot, which it never outgrew, and probably needs to.

Re:Umm... (1)

Guest316 (3014867) | about 6 months ago | (#45908649)

"in Javascript" is a classic headline decorator at Slashdot, which it never outgrew, and probably needs to.

It really does. Netcraft confirms it.

Re:Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45909239)

It really does. Netcraft confirms it in JavaScript.

FTFY. HTH.

Re:Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45908515)

EDWARD SNOWDEN!?!?! There. Is the article exciting now?

Re:Umm... (4, Funny)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 6 months ago | (#45909237)

Edward Snowden 3D Prints Bitcoins Using Javascript on iPhone 6 Protoype in Self Driving Car Due to Global Warming

Re:Umm... (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 6 months ago | (#45909247)

Damn, I really want to read that article now!

Re:Umm... (1)

zlives (2009072) | about 6 months ago | (#45909341)

needs more BitCoin

Re:Umm... (3, Funny)

roman_mir (125474) | about 6 months ago | (#45910771)

While driving a pink Tesla.

Re:Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45914621)

> While driving a pink Tesla.

Onto a SpaceX vehicle.

Re:Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45909257)

Need to add BITCOIN!

How soon before "Mr & Mrs Everywhere"? (2)

david.emery (127135) | about 6 months ago | (#45908107)

As predicted by John Brunner's "Stand on Zanzibar" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_on_Zanzibar ): a video system where your face is superimposed on the screen, showing you visiting exotic locations, participating in dramas, etc, etc?

POT (Personal Open Terminal) allows imagination (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45908285)

i look like this; (;^)-)-| when i am sleeping, after coffee it's more like this; =(:*(|-(- scary,, on a lighter note knopfler et pals http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vC3FCS-NtAI real music from before

Was obviously calibrated on white people (2)

Fwipp (1473271) | about 6 months ago | (#45908645)

The demo worked fine for me, but completely failed to find my black partner's face, preferring instead a spot on the wall behind them. Obviously this isn't a professional product, but it's disappointing that simply locating a black person's face is still a missing feature in 2014.

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (-1, Troll)

Dishwasha (125561) | about 6 months ago | (#45908755)

but completely failed to find my black partner's face

Sorry to burst your bubble but the product can detect a black person's face fine...just not gay black people.

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45909779)

People DO have business partners, you know.

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45908783)

Did you forget to call the devs Waaacist?

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (1)

Lord Kano (13027) | about 6 months ago | (#45910139)

Did you forget to call the devs Waaacist?

If by "devs" you mean "devils".

LK

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45909731)

Dark faces are challenging unless using projected IR light(a la night vision) due to these things usually relying on contrast to locate the nostrils, eyes and mouth. Basically, the closer the skin tone is to the iris and nostrils, the higher video fidelity and lighting quality needed to differentiate the two. It isn't a racism thing and can be worked around with better lighting or a better camera if IR isn't an option.

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45909763)

To expand on this, this behaviour is also seen on some cellphone unlocks and even the Kinect/Natal units had a hard time originally. The new Kinect much less so since it has a variety of other bits of biometric data with which to base itself.

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45909739)

This is for facial recognition of people not subhuman beasts.

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 6 months ago | (#45909879)

It can't fully even do a white person with a beard. It's like it assumes everyone on the net is a 12 year old boy in the suburbs.

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45909969)

So it was programmed by clergy members?

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45919287)

Good point, 12 year old boys from the suburbs are the only light skinned people without beads.

Re:Was obviously calibrated on white people (1)

istartedi (132515) | about 6 months ago | (#45910505)

TFA claims it was trained on the MUCT database which includes various ethnicities. Maybe there's not enough contrast in your image.

What a relief (2)

Dishwasha (125561) | about 6 months ago | (#45908699)

Now when my new internet girlfriend wants to skype for the first time, she won't find out that the pictures I posted on my dating profile were faked from a google image search for hunk.

nt (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45908715)

I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes.

Poor tracking (1)

loufoque (1400831) | about 6 months ago | (#45909203)

It fails as soon as I move.

Re:Poor tracking (1)

Anomalyst (742352) | about 6 months ago | (#45909411)

Remaining in Mom's basement doesn't seem to an egregiously burdensome pre-requisite.

This + hasciicam (1)

Rinikusu (28164) | about 6 months ago | (#45909641)

Would make for more interesting videos, anyway... :D

real time my ass (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 6 months ago | (#45909851)

Unless you're sitting still it often lags behind and any realistic movement would guarantee you face would not be hidden. Javascript developers have an odd sense of what real time is.

Re:real time my ass (1)

Georules (655379) | about 6 months ago | (#45911751)

'Real-time' usually seems to mean to a lot of people 'you don't have to do a processing step after saving data to see results, but instead see a stream as the data is collected'. 'Real-time' doesn't require that the system have no lag (impossible), but at least latency should be known. Which, I will grant you, is likely not known in this case.

Re:real time my ass (1)

EmperorArthur (1113223) | about 6 months ago | (#45911757)

Unless you're sitting still it often lags behind and any realistic movement would guarantee you face would not be hidden. Javascript developers have an odd sense of what real time is.

Javascript and real time should never be used together. For all the improvements by browser vendors javascript is still almost as slow as the US congress.

Too many things working only on Chrome (1)

Windwraith (932426) | about 6 months ago | (#45912337)

I don't specially dislike Chrome other than the fact that I don't use it, but whenever something web hits slashdot it's almost always Chrome-only. Any explanation for this?

Works in Firefox (1)

roca (43122) | about 6 months ago | (#45913115)

It works in Firefox for me. The start button remains grayed out for some reason, but you can click on it.

Here it comes... (1)

Aldenissin (976329) | about 6 months ago | (#45917651)

real time photo-shopping of celebrities on live television...

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...