What This/That Threads - Time for a Level Playing Field

[India Four Two]

More and more players are becoming aware that there are two ways to play the "What Aerodrome/Cockpit/Etc.", so I think it's time to level the playing field.

First, there's the traditional way of playing, where someone posts a picture and the rest of us do research and ask questions of the OP, in order to zoom in on the answer. Lots of fun and challenging.

Then there's the other way. Copy the image and upload it to Google Image. If the OP posts an image from the Internet, you will know the answer immediately. You can either post the answer within five minutes of the OP's post and impress him with your encyclopedic knowledge or, more subtly, you can string him along with a couple of questions before the final denouement.

Pointless in my opinion and no fun, but it does seem to appeal to the ex-fighter jocks among us. I guess they still like to do things at high speed.

So how to avoid this problem? You need to modify an Internet image so that is not recognized by Google Image. It is not easy. I have had luck with mirror-images, cropping and rotation by a few degrees (or all of the above). However, the results are not consistent. I see other users have resorted to blurring or colour changes.

You just have to persevere and test your modified image by uploading it to Google Image.

[Allan Lupton]

I agree.
In another forum which is devoted to quiz photos, we have a ban on Google Image Search - as someone rightly said, where's the fun in that?
It is difficult to enforce, but in the main everyone accepts that it is the core knowledge backed by research that is what we like when we waste so much time this way!
Trouble can come when someone simply knows the answer straight away and the rest of us suspect GIS.

Oh and not to confuse the easily confused, searching for an image by name using Google is not the same as GSI, and well within the acceptable research.

[Capetonian]

This should also apply to the 'Where on Earth' thread. I like to play by using knowledge and clues, and not just Googling for images, no fun in that, it's like shooting fish in a barrel.

[India Four Two]

Wow! Three views and two posts already. This thread might have some legs. ;)

[Rosevidney1]

And to think that I was impressed with the knowledge of these guys, when all the time it was often a swizz!

[TheiC]

Hence why I try to produce my own images, or manipulate others in photoshop-style programmes to fox those with apparently lightning reflexes.

[Noyade]

photoshop-style programmes As President of the Australasian Anti-Google Image Research Facility I have endeavored to defeat the process without having to resort to outlaying money for photoshop thingamajigs.

Unfortunately we've had poor results. Lately we tried templates with paper requiring only rudimentary scissor skills and initially GI was defeated - try it...

http://i44.tinypic.com/731ls8.jpg

However, the cunning can then simply remove the majority of the template by cropping and alas, I'm defeated...

Bugger! (https://www.google.com.au/search?tbs=sbi:AMhZZivQ2Nk8Ey-DV-ctKNWyRnODwIlEJFUeDFGXjVuZgKDfNFw5jRODX9c0K4Vj9Pl5JrySD1O-98CKDaaQ-bJeSTAi7HIhGCgmjTuFNz1t0tvr4QwHxa-ZhpsoynKIohgBcwupfwFQFHUl-AcvpRS-cqKTl-aCZMX6LHAcqgV5psg0QBQPSeZfdYiY4HWFPZpU5EG69eyRKk6XEM9yvW0B0l F7YSiR81c5qxz_16BXtQtJbqi6Op708mEFIJArwbPckE1VW4B-6zLfgL9YPo1Haw7InGHYzLoRqEblLyuu9F2QgUwI93jHZhNtKG15UEblseRR LrQrFpGMmb4KGel2lIDk4wtUXIIT5BC5jpt1zaYfRjPCa7NSz6wK_1wfKJTC c3hn1FJecJQyiJDvoYvEhbvwKsNHebKKhS4ZY-_1jSmrDxp7FoP6uiw4V6inCH72ZzZfHdt7AZLTPn8gHhwFi7xzJFXRAs6Edu jGa9czG5sMqY_1waYTIxiLjM6UXT8UXcKeBk7HC5BrdLcQlhVtL_1xXHvkOl qc70YFRFYUwDYq56OIBDhODV1wjIV7BTcVtikzydJrgS6ioE02UUwdNFPjyZ goR3iijU5JPrIpZ_1uRwiWYnlW_1JM4jhMoVgfnRm_1ROomeHJ1RtG4xsHMT svduza4GoQHlCNPK1cHCpGp-4Lk9ozEzOJpOGahaG4tBUFAGlp5DpM3n-Yu4qbWG36FM2fw4uGWMA7-5Ym_1kmoGbcENg5cCLN2F72vgsC77FxST-lMEpNSQDnJy32SbARYuW-8bFQ7SXs0TAeFE9CtygA_1M1P1mUZOzVih7AsTbrTWYrPznmXqS61FiVjFF5 BxW5VH26S9Km-SticJpQw2GU2cu58IH5jHcIi90mnEiFo1fPl0331WCIBlJ6nls_1zDcsTyB1 vYX2IBXP9sd-ia07u8IG0bO3GXPL7a33Ony_1-xfXItFQeZNkw5ntPfxJQV767GYGp5Uoy6-tLcxeQiN9wBdrz_1uBMwDUxfIrkbWduWwEuJ-2ajTiX2S-BGA0ODzmvb0n1CjQv5JgEcrOpRoxpPcr1iMDIh8adfO0_1RMHJWAYO_1qLYd Zq_1xyeJ5bIP7GU1QkL5lBGgDyTTUH6ABkR74Lr8whP-qn7bFL-Y0kfZQbQOGI1oG-czJA-JZveg6Z48gevXzbieDq03F50jlRtfKRQ9E3LijyC5NFISBF1P3dLvzQKUSF-CHixzWAqXaKVY2rxZJZUFwWlaSXOQZgLQPQteaOB4yuhRCJIA-81ZCCEoCFyGrVvbxruMGVAW3JPOkSAb_1dxP_1IA&bih=550&biw=1280)

http://i43.tinypic.com/y03yv.jpg

I'd be very happy to hear from any other research team from around the world who have had any success in defeating GI in a simple cost-effective way.

[Noyade]

And lets not underestimate our enemy. The power of Google Image is simple "awesome". Here's a demonstration of its awesomeness...

Scanned from a twenty-year old magazine (partial ring-binder hole at top right) with the company insignia painted over...

http://i43.tinypic.com/awap92.jpg

Punch it into the Google Image machine...

Ya gotta be kidding me?! (https://www.google.com.au/search?tbs=sbi:AMhZZitK_1LkYy8Dk15GGh9ZdAvfiJBDH_1SVV0Bws1kg ld3bjVDmNPbyJN-V4if2WS3hlbhKNRPf2GUJ-by03ehYl84yWZrYa9F7yX3S33F3AqE93DCK2cnYVfx6szaWKZCtmj_1Y-EG7nM0S2Ub-iuVEPDFofp0Gc8O8-BLFSqMMNCMDzyqoEq7DJWc8MQ76XJKo3aCWe_1MDLnooWPly2v9nle0vCNci 6t5jvoTEM0R4nXF4Pz9PXmiM4kA-maUeWtXyBKf2c2sDexEbrZx_1SHAp7qgo8OYqT8xHOiFfUPC9PxIqVj-CReejCfjZzMIAn9dPuIXWjZL1JKmDu6NyQQF0HS1HN76fmZJKZ4sCyS3j9qX tII1Bd9yblwCGVpixDEbtPkIQaBUGQze-3_1V8L_1VoMOJhwfqA84hBKUnIwkpf2PZOog8Fo4xury0jK6xc9XV5k-yln2z5u2DqjT3TqKPa2uaGEd7si472OMwBdtNZ8ABUHxk0yy7SSMFij8Y19R 97A0KOcYiRl_1jm4XMZvGDNin2TKfO4O1oic7deIXtsPmZjNM_1sQzxTd_1A eDCZUsKqDuaMp-bLT5M9tcARZFt7GD34OXJjx7vS8t4v9NHaUhD37H9rd9_1VmrQCdvmsIB1YL xlFwi6udM8gc3RPqi1HH9AaTzrqOurAXoWsrn7uR7bzS8aepbUvpxsGVHo-x3fc-WfZkZiXN_1l0efZcuEwmeoSVTIQRXpwjY3wpeH0KpJ9ttMzKopHuQxmlkh90 8TnB0yNPwwRFzYIBCuf7f3TFN_11nw8wwJDDKu9RN9buSkusq99ZXd9Hoqp6 Jrkw--f-sG5HPI3XeEtj1XgA68hMHu9oqR9axyXWJPp9Y3_1QCzEPTwIS5ey84taIxIW t14TlQUshyVUd735VTZwD2ML5NrFLVX_1buTeIul4dWFwln8b22b-aQZc5Cy-aDuSh4aDAWHmTTB8KfoMv845gDs0PyPOOMKDU7yvVBmp0cZmvtBI21e1-YPd0gZkludvOyw-w5dFbUgtLuTjD0d72Mwd6Q8NTbXBrBWMM-DYiyPevIMz4euEhirNJtIExvYUb_1HG-EihDO38ouKKcOlnV4xbPxjVPVxy58GhVtHoPvUpzHOLqBW3viaPqFzMhs9bt RoN3Pw1VhUv9vABsg_16Zyfrjp5zmRDL5qrAJHVyDfSB23d14a8-QpyV5M8j8ZeVVM4HNBnIyNTBQBNguJEp8fID1RTkhhh1nlWYP7Ok1wtU5TOp dEsfQ6EvLUnSyH6xS2w0pJt6N6GSj0PCU4EJA0tdkhHMd4B-kD-4-MQyWOHR6H2gsyRynQ7S3QL4P_1kD7WvnahrbaSl1n7lB2YumvtryQe7WmGAs hwcf8A&bih=550&biw=1280)

Even though my image doesn't appear, it seems GI has the ability to recognise general outlines, dial and lever positions, shadows, body position or whatever and come up with the correct answer.

[India Four Two]

those with apparently lightning reflexes.

Swift is the Hunter who chases the Phantom image with a Javelin ;)

[MReyn24050]

I totally agree with all the above comments. I now check every image I post on Google Image prior to posting. Unfortunately a number of great challenges have had to be discarded as a result. Sometimes it is possible to use a mirror image but with "What Cockpit" that is not possible. Australasian Anti-Google Image Research Facility keep up the research.

[nacluv]

All in favour here.

I have been 'victim' of this - by someone (TheiC's subtle suggestion above may lead you to the perp;)) who just blatantly posted the answer and stated that it was too easy to GI the image I had posted. What a complete ******!

Hence why I have been off the thread since, until recently, when I trawled through some old snaps of my own which should - in theory at least - fail the GI test.

But even that is easily defeated if someone else somewhere in the world has posted something which GI picks out as being similar, as highlighted above.

[Noyade]

Unfortunately a number of great challenges have had to be discarded as a result.I hear ya Mel! :ok: That's the bit that hurts mate. We can't change human behavior but if there is a simple method of defeating or bypassing GIs ability to recognise images, I really would love to hear them!

One bizarre method I experimented with was...placing glad wrap on the scanner glass. Now don't laugh!

Try it. Google Image this one...

http://i42.tinypic.com/3128yz4.jpg


Now try this...

http://i39.tinypic.com/v8d0md.jpg

Unfortunately it does make aerodromes look like last nights dinner and GI unbelievably still sees through the disguise...

Oh come on, are you serious?! (https://www.google.com.au/search?tbs=sbi:AMhZZiuyqCZiD7DFp2DeVX62hRdXgnPgbcz4Def7f6syh Jd1VX6DWIIbH2dgUQoSeX2ZupwEWNpgd2qwOfQWwq1x0h6HEHEdEsZa8sqL5 NWyKuzTt4NBvggey3GLOWu_1Xy0hVef34KM87X3Uqsh8QMXFAQe0w1WGVAbT QDun7-aMkNud5DXSCHKQ14bJudDyqyhXE0vTj59jtVe_1l4BzeMbOhfpYhCfOaRtse hWUKa3RDNKxH5YsmX0vsyl8vMOuM-u6LHhsHJBUDkYzf5sTpalMgN6L8Wmp2rrcmH-oqEPpV58JR2tH2zKDOfNjcKpjmmBpcLcB7Sfp6aZTBVNoxZDMk13aBQTq1I8 m4AkAv3TFGLSgvq4LO13YqE-ltYBWlg2pc5j2oxDmD2WnakXgFI4H9UMMpeI0b9wseQWZsOzh_12MbwuaFgd hUi_1puRE2RIfmLa6Ysl5u8ItNI3SSaDmfGGeAHDydhQVxuKb2SlqQnd3zFP rtNHPe38iL68jGUhqFwmEPLfkP1TmOS-0OfoE-o68IuNfRNIODKQKJMWZn71jLVdSbjhcDEbcPJ-aDyF7qnrrmeAd3tQE0rxP-Ap-jziaiIiL4MUTp27aZ_1f3AaA-7vjj5k_1Us-Eo1YAkaJZLVv-8z20-TqBrnwlu57S_1T9vhqA8o6r-lAiPCxEhsuMGxRoHlYT3JDWgp-zdxzSG2_17vo0r3tevzYm20c9L_1Qc6P7Z3eZ2nnnt1d4v82aRfMil233-K2xXSPZSdogbvYuNOBXtzxS9nKMax4h6zZdcuNT_1rx92cDNqR22bc-5KMzcMaA1J6Llt5gHMevcDQHsGpSoL6saJKWVYQmBcRK7UKhRwUAmkur1eMP pu_1AvE9dzEV56Dk02O0amdUdhLM3KNB9av0F55bITJhKHMFbAhRDSrBPKBK VaefTPsegjbDPA2KpHM6GpKMjxYxXOaQgt12h5dgVnoLgSOxdOAVX1wsx_1-kgF_16Wboz00-adqmhn9yGQXzOrJLdNQPNcbY2KdslvY_118KYHcyHT1rhexqSb6vXekUT1P2 Y_1OdjsjBZbcY5puXE0pSDfaw8EV4V4jzadrfyFDFjaA5a0-Nqvy1uOp82_1IKpe0fxhO2DvLOkvu4NSGGTN2G6eFxV7TPI6lOu7ZD00xB-fqQ9QPUb9RSeou-b71uVqkVxXMDsrUKwa_1S0_11xzFnxMGUiQn_1fiFxyzq3ys2srvu9at5HD-lfBVq7wlueBRt5qTumzp-AxFvzR0Y1_16LUlsM-q1S6zr6Gc9Ktoxs4iS4bpoj1KvLSkfEZwld0YXuq-DjekOy0vZhbcc0RyqVA-si0q_1_1NKUiZu5n0C2xVvQEUrGZ8SM3zrxk5EmYvBJ7gQ&bih=550&biw=1280)

http://i43.tinypic.com/b7kw1e.jpg

[MReyn24050]

Graeme. Your first image 'galdwrapped' worked ok and seemed to defeat GI, but the second one, the P-61, did not. I thought you had the answer there worth testing further though I think.
Mel

[sisemen]

Another method is to completely disguise the subject photograph making it appear as something else entirely.

For instance, take this altered photograph of a Spitfire MkVII:
http://www.world-war-2-planes.com/images/lancaster_full_sharp.jpg (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=lancaster&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=NfR868MdrAgnCM&tbnid=SwrlXvpWJwVyBM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.world-war-2-planes.com%2Favro_lancaster.html&ei=WLORUarvCsLDlAXC74HYBQ&bvm=bv.46471029,d.dGI&psig=AFQjCNETKEzLnBUIM5GicK-dzHUnsvMpOQ&ust=1368589515745753)

Clever, I think you'll agree!

[India Four Two]

Clever, I think you'll agree!

but only suitable for clairvoyants!

[sisemen]

Nah. The clues are all there:

Rolls Royce Merlin engine
British manufacture
Propellor driven
brown and green paint job
RAF roundel
machine guns

How much more do you want???

[India Four Two]

You're right. Eight Brownings! So obvious.

[Capetonian]

Would defacing the image like this work?


https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7593647/image%20defaced.jpg

[India Four Two]

Capetonian,

Hard to tell, since I cannot see that image on the Internet already. Is it posted anywhere?

[Capetonian]

I don't know, it's my own photo. I assumed that a similar photo of that pub might exist elsewhere on the internet as it's in quite a well known tourist spot.

[India Four Two]

Ironically, after the next time Google crawls this thread, your defaced image WILL be in the GI database!

[Noyade]

but the second one, the P-61, did notYes. So now I tried this. A sheet of clear plastic with grid-lines drawn on it and placed on the scanner. Initially they were thin lines, but GI saw through them, literally. So then I doubled the thickness.

Now I know it looks ugly, but it's a start. Looks like it defeated GI? Try it yourself...

http://i42.tinypic.com/30hsaxh.jpg

My GI search result...

http://i43.tinypic.com/4t1p53.jpg

Next plan it to remove the lines, one by one (bit like that sticks game) until GI starts to recognise it again - if you get my drift.

Cheers from the Laboratory.

[TheiC]

...I wonder whether having random lines rather than organised ones would allow fewer lines? Especially if they are placed in particular areas of the image? This would allow important details to be left clear as clues for legitimate players.

I guess it's busy in the lab dunnunda... Wishing you success!

[sharksandwich]

I would be pleased to see an easy, definitive solution. At the moment a simple right click, "properties", leads to the source no matter what has subsequently been done to the image.

[Allan Lupton]

Yes, but that's only a problem if you link an internet image direct. The current aerodrome links to the poster's photobucket account so either he took the photo or he copied it from an internet source on to photobucket.

[Lightning Mate]

What has worked for me several times is to use the Photoshop "neon glow" application.

[Capot]

Oh God, this is dreadful. I never even knew you could do that. How unaware can one be?

I only ever got one right (Autocrat) because it was what I learned to fly in and looked vaguely familiar. I've followed assiduously for some thing else to appear that I've flown, and it has happened, but I was always too slow.

I though all you guys must have encyclopedias for brains and/or had flown a huge number of types.

But I still think that Evansb knows a hell of a lot about aircraft!

[cuefaye]

Should somebody (not me!) suggest a new set of rules to ensure continued interest in this thread. 'Twould be a shame to see it dissolve, but it surely is in need of genuine challenge and interest? The GI 'experts' and their clever responses have been outed: but no figure pointing! Let someone stand up to the plate.

[Lightning Mate]

To illustrate a point, try GI with the upper image (doctored) and then the lower (original).

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu82/Lightning_29/contraption1_zps01c6f406.jpg

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu82/Lightning_29/contraption2_zps77fb45f3.jpg

[Airclues]

I don't really mind who wins, or how they do it. I just enjoy looking at photos of airfields, especially aerial views of airfields.

Dave

[Noyade]

Photoshop "neon glow" application. If what you said a while back about photoshop is true, I sure as hell won't be investing in it! :=:)

http://i40.tinypic.com/1553xcg.jpg

[fauteuil volant]

When posting an identification challenge on another forum, I found a picture on the internet which was incorrectly captioned. I was aware of that and was able correctly to identify the aircraft. I then posted that image and, surprise, surprise, the answer given was that of the incorrect caption! When this was drawn to the attention of the person who gave as an answer the same identity as the incorrect caption, and he was asked whether he had used Google Image to give the answer that he did, he seemed not best pleased.