Page 1 of 1
Detectability of Morpheus Picture

Posted:
Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:57 pm
by Jim10956
How easy is it to detect a picture created using Morpheus? Could someone who has Morpheus installed take a pic and "deconstruct" it to show that it was a composite?

Posted:
Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:08 pm
by Ark
No, there is no way to decontruct a picture from a mix from Morpheus Photo Mixer into the two oringal pictures. You can easily remove the original pictures from the first and final frames of animations created for morphs or warps though.

Posted:
Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:59 am
by Jim10956
Even if it cannot be deconstructed, can it be identified as a morphed picture?

Posted:
Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:42 pm
by Ark
That's probably a matter of opinion and how severe of a photo mix you create.
If you are talking about morphs, which result in animations, it would be difficult NOT to tell that the animation of one thing turning into another was anything but a morph.

Posted:
Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:57 pm
by Jim10956
I don't mean an animation. If you have one base picture and you add features from one or more other pictures to create a finished product that is an amalgum of the various pictures, can that composite be recognized as something that was manufactured?
We are attempting to find a software program that will allow a fairly quick and easy creation that is difficult to identify as a made up image to be used in criminal cases involving online child predators.

Posted:
Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:26 am
by Ark
You are talking about Photo Mixes, which can be created by Morpheus Photo Mixer or Morpheus Photo Animation Suite.
Assuming you are subtle about what you mix and the two pictures you are mixing are fairly similar, then no, there is no way you could tell that the resulting picture was mixed. With absolutely any software that does something similar to this, it would always be possible to tell that the mix is manufactured if you choose to exaggerate the results too much or mix drastically different pictures.

Posted:
Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:11 pm
by Jim10956
Thanks. That's what I needed to hear.