Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

https://mortenhannemose.github.io/lena/

by gumeo • 3 years ago

298 217 3 years ago

mortenhannemose.github.io

nix235• 3 years ago

First why not Lenard and Second, the picture (the short one) shows her hair and ceiling and not her breasts.

And Third but minor complaint, if we look at the "Full" picture i at least "want" to see his butt.

seventytwo2• 3 years ago

It’s true. Imagery comparison is highly dependent on butts.

nix235• 3 years ago

It's all about the lights and "well" rounded "objects". But a bavarian belly could do the job as well.

CydeWeys2• 3 years ago

Dude, it's literally porn. This is not hard.

nix235• 3 years ago

Dude, it's literally porn. This is not hard.

You are going to far, i don't think Lenard has anything todo with porn...well maybe the feather is a bit inappropriate for the normal US-Citizen but if you look at your Music-videos i don't think it's too much.

super2564• 3 years ago

Erotica =/= Porn

throw0095• 3 years ago

What sort of hussy shows her shoulders?

daneel_w5• 3 years ago

It's not pornography. The full image is erotic in its nature. The cropped image aligns with pretty much any other non-nude glamour photography.

matthews2• 3 years ago

Background: the original Lena picture comes from the Playboy Magazine, and the model doesn't want people to use it.

https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/it-s-time-to-retire-...

seventytwo2• 3 years ago

Didn’t realize the model doesn’t want people using it. That holds more weight in my mind than the fact that it was in playboy.

iamflimflam13• 3 years ago

Yes, this definitely changes things. Previously the model didn't seem to be bothered and seemed to find it all quite amusing.

People change their minds and we should respect their wishes.

benj1114• 3 years ago

Really? Presumably she was paid.

I don't know what the copyright situation is, but assuming she doesn't hold that I don't know what the issue is.

Isn't it like trump objecting to images of his in court accompanying a news item?

enriquto• 3 years ago

It's not so clear that she doesn't want people to use that image. She has assisted several times at image processing conferences, and has stated recently that she was proud of the fact that so many people used that photo. The documentary linked above shows footage of herself talking about the photo, but she never really says people should not use it. The website hosting the documentary has several heavily editorialized quotations that suggest that.

That said, this new "lennart" is hilarious and I would like to use it instead of the original one.

EDIT: here's a 2019 interview where she appears to pose with the same hat again : https://www.wired.com/story/finding-lena-the-patron-saint-of...

sorenjan4• 3 years ago

It's not really up to models to decide what their pictures gets used for though. Why should this be different?

From what I gather it's not because she's uncomfortable with it being used, it's because of controversy other people have drummed up:

When I asked her if she had heard anything about the recent controversy around her image, she seemed alarmed at the thought that she could have a part in hurting or discouraging young women. I sent her some articles about the Lenna and later gave her a call to see what she made of them. The photo, she said, doesn’t show very much—just down to her shoulders—so it was hard for her to see what the big deal was.

https://www.wired.com/story/finding-lena-the-patron-saint-of...

Not that it really matters that much, it's a historical curiosity by now.

Findecanor• 3 years ago

... And here I had tracked down her address and was about to mail her a print-out, with a request to ask her to sign it.

I had been planning to display it in a glass cabinet next to my Melitta teapot and Luxo jr lamp and ball. (and if anyone has a lead on a terracotta rabbit, please let me know ;)

shultays• 3 years ago

Huh, I remember reading about her finding it interesting, even attending one image processing conference as a guest, but maybe I misremembering?

edit: apparently she changed her mind later

jtriangle9• 3 years ago

She was championed up until a few years ago as the "Queen of JPEG", and was fairly active in that community.

Rightly so too, it's an image of her, but, more importantly, that image is very difficult to compress efficiently and maintain acceptable quality. There are other images that could have been used, but, an image of her was used, and she enjoyed the celebrity from that until recently.

She is allowed, of course, to change her mind, much as the rest of the world is allowed to consider her past behavior when deciding how they respond to her changing her mind.

logimus• 3 years ago

Really some computer vision guy told she was at some conference to give out signatures.

sorenjan4• 3 years ago

In 1997 and 2015.

From the picture's Wikipedia:

Lenna is so widely accepted in the image processing community that Forsén was a guest at the 50th annual Conference of the Society for Imaging Science and Technology (IS&T) in 1997.[18] In 2015, Lena Forsén was also guest of honor at the banquet of IEEE ICIP 2015.[19] After delivering a speech, she chaired the best paper award ceremony.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna

dsr_• 3 years ago

The more personal an artifact is, the more I think the subject's wishes should be taken into account.

https://qntm.org/mmacevedo is a much more in-depth examination...

mytailorisrich2• 3 years ago

The model in question posed for nude pictures in Playboy...

The whole 'controversy' is pure spin in an age when everything has to be controversial.

josephcsible2• 3 years ago

Contrast that case with this one: https://www.boredpanda.com/unflattering-donald-trump-chin-ph...

Why is it that in the former, everyone says you're a horrible person who deserves to be cancelled if you ignore the subject's wishes to not use the picture, but in the latter, everyone says it's a great thing if you ignore the subject's wishes to not use the picture?

raincole• 3 years ago

Correct answer: because one is politican and the other isn't

Real answer: because people have double, triple, multiple standards.

Steltek• 3 years ago

Because ridiculing world leaders is essential to liberty and free exercise of democracy? Especially POTUS, which is arguably the top of the heap. You don't need to agree, believe it has any merit, or anything like that. It's more important that the right exists than how it's used.

abofh2• 3 years ago

Exceeding scope; I took your picture and used it in an ad campaign, I exceeded scope. I took your picture as president of a country and used it in a blog, I didn't.

This is a trivial discussion, but that's your answer

smcl4• 3 years ago

Lena has been used for years and this use doesn't necessarily result in you being "cancelled", it might make your colleagues say "hey, can you use something other than lena?" though. The model is a pretty private figure (as she said, she’s not a model anymore) and has not given us any reason not to respect her wishes, so if she has asked the community not to then it's only decent to refrain from using her picture.

Trump is an extremely controversial person who has stirred up no end of trouble and in addition he has directed more than his own fair share of bodyshaming towards others. It does not surprise me in the slightest that people are not willing to extend him the courtesy of not sharing a picture of him that he doesn't like.

I'm not in the business of using or distributing these pictures, so I am quite happy not using either. I'm just attempting to explain why people feel this way. I personally quite like the Ethically Sourced Lena, it made me smile :)

bee_rider4• 3 years ago

It actually is not great that people decided to go after Trump’s various sensitive physical traits. He’s an awful person and there are many far more substantial things to criticize him on. Making fun of his weight, even though it feels good to say negative things about a bad person, reinforces the idea that this is somehow a valid criticism.

I can see why people do it. He’s the worst, it feels good to say negative things about him. And he also has a tendency to go for shallow physical descriptions of people as criticism. So it has the feeling of “turnabout is fair play.” But it is a failure to restrain lesser instincts.

googlryas2• 3 years ago

I love how mostly liberal(and good) viewpoints about the badness of body shaming go out the window when it comes to their enemies. Whether it was about his weight, or penis or hand size. Heck, there was even a popular statue made of a nude trump with a micropenis which people were lining up to have their picture taken with.

rom-antics2• 3 years ago

That article doesn't support the headline. The closest it gets is saying nobody asked her beforehand, but she doesn't say after the fact that she wants people to stop.

Meanwhile, from the people who actually bothered to talk to her[1]:

In her view, the photograph is an immense accomplishment that just happened to take on a life of its own. “I’m really proud of that picture,” she said.

This whole situation reminds me of GitHub, Fuck Your Name Change[2]. People want to drum up outrage and don't care one bit about the people involved.

Is it really worth erasing a piece of computing history because of some kids virtue signaling about a picture that was taken before they were born?

[1] https://www.wired.com/story/finding-lena-the-patron-saint-of...

[2] https://mooseyanon.medium.com/github-f-ck-your-name-change-d...

iameli3• 3 years ago

Did you watch the video? She said that she would like to retire from having her picture used in this way.

nemo44x4• 3 years ago

Is Playboy exploitive or empowering today? I can't keep up.

pseudalopex5• 3 years ago

Every day is the day when people have individual opinions. And those opinions can be more complex than good or bad.

gpuhacker• 3 years ago

Brilliant! Wish the license was explicitly stated on the page.

kelseyfrog• 3 years ago

Release the full image.

benj1114• 3 years ago

So we're swapping the possibly problematic ethics of a original with the possibly problematic ethics of showing this to people?

I mean is it normal to find that mustache and hat combo this attractive, (as a hetero male)???

Dobbs• 3 years ago

How is this image ethically problematic?

daneel_w5• 3 years ago

It isn't. Just like the original and the cropped version aren't ethically problematic. It was a commercial photo shoot performed under paid contract with a public magazine.

cwmoore2• 3 years ago

Aesthetically problematic has an ethical component (and you all know it) but it’s a distortion of a familiar work (meant to cause a response) and ethical questions of Rick Rolling or whatever you call it are less important ethically but not immaterial.

Edit: the image also steals from Mona Lisa’s mustache and DaVinci is under copyright for seven additional years.

benj1114• 3 years ago

I was mainly joking.

Although the are issues about this in a professional setting.

If you display this to a prospective client in place of Lena, they think it's unprofessional and don't employ your services, your company goes under and you lose your job, is there not an ethical component to that?

hidelooktropic2• 3 years ago

In a way, it's actually more offensive. I get that this is a joke. I don't think the author expects anybody to actually use this image, but the call is to retire the lena image not to continue it in a different fashion. I can see someone interpreting this as another man making a joke of women being offended so they step in themselves, "because men are tougher and don't get offended as easily."

martinjacobd• 3 years ago

Meh I don't find the man unattractive personally. But I also wouldn't say he's attractive. Different strokes, may a hundred flowers blossom, etc. I certainly don't think it's ethically wrong to show this to people, or at least not for this reason. I do question if it's appropriate for the workplace though. I guess it depends?

But I think it's fairly clear that the point wasn't to be attractive.

iamflimflam13• 3 years ago

One of the advantages of everyone using the same picture is that it's quite easy to compare different algorithms.

There are obviously better pictures that could be used - ones that would have characteristics that let you test and compare different aspects of whatever algorithms you are using.

Not sure the picture in the OP is particularly useful if I'm honest.

vidarh3• 3 years ago

The risk of everyone using the same image for actual tests is overfitting.

It's not clear that continuing to use the Lena image is particularly useful. It's more of a tradition than anything else.

cwmoore2• 3 years ago

Cannot unsee. Regardless of source, not ethical.

aaa_aaa• 3 years ago

Just no.

mrpopo• 3 years ago

I think in order to be used in image tech, it shouldn't be shipped as PNG, even with lossless compression. It should be BMP, ideally with the PBM, PGM and PPM formats too.

Not sure how serious this is, though. :/

turnsout2• 3 years ago

I think if you’re working in computer graphics you can work out how to convert a PNG.

ok123456• 3 years ago

The point is you want a compression and artifact free benchmark image.

jtriangle9• 3 years ago

PNG is mathmatically lossless, so, you can easily decompress it into whatever format you'd like, while benefitting from a smaller file size.

That's the whole point.

EGreg2• 3 years ago

Shakespeare would be proud.

(EDIT: I was gonna leave it up there as with my other dry humor but here, for all you Americans: https://www.bl.uk/shakespeare/articles/shakespeare-and-gende...)

nness• 3 years ago

This got a chuckle out of me!

sergiotapia• 3 years ago

"However, 46 years on, Lena is still being used as a test image. According to Creatable and Code Like Girl, this is symbolic of how women were left out and pushed out of the industry."

No comment necessary.

throw0095• 3 years ago

Plenty of comment necessary.

Models give up the rights to their image to be paid for the shoot.

Why is it that a century of legal and moral president needs to be thrown out because someone says they don't like it?

The only person with a leg to stand on here is the photographers whose copyright is being infringed and even that is debatable.

jakear• 3 years ago

I think the point is it's hypocritical to say "this photo of a woman has been in use for 40 years, it's an example or how women are left out of the industry". It makes some unsubstantiated assumptions, chiefly: "men are more likely to want to look at a woman's photo than a woman is".

Take a look at any popular female "influencer" Instagram account's follower list and let me know if thats backed up by the facts (hint: it isn't. Not by a long shot.)

(Some) women want to look at (some) women. (Some) men want to look at (some) women. (Some) women want to look at (some) men. (Some) men want to look at (some) men.

The answer is clearly to have both men and women in the sample data. Not exclude people based on their gender.

If there was a direct quote from the model themself calling for the end of the use of the photo that'd be one thing, but based on what I've seen here it doesn't exist.

jtriangle9• 3 years ago

The photographers were under contract by Playboy inc, who has publicly stated that they will not seek litigation to prevent the use of the image.

So that more or less makes it public domain, and, it would be a very, very difficult court case if Playboy wanted to suddenly prevent use of the image, given that they have never tried to defend their ownership of it.

So, not even they have a leg to stand on.

froggertoaster• 3 years ago

Funny concept, but the premise that the origin of the image is unethically sourced is suspect in and of itself. Can we stop with these signal-y type posts?

dspillett• 3 years ago

Ignoring the question of the ethics of the original place the image was published, which is a long and many sided discussion that no one is going to “win” any time soon, there is a second issue: the ethics of using an unlicensed image. This may also be a grey area (some arguing “information wants to be free” overrides such matters), but legally the “ethics” are far more black and white.

Though I think these comments are getting far too bogged down on the ethics and legality of using the Lena image, and ignoring the fact that Morten's new image & related post is (at least mainly) intended as a bit of fun, poking at just these sorts of discussions.

olalonde• 3 years ago

This is like GitHub renaming master branch to main branch in an effort to attract more Black Americans to tech. AKA a virtue signaling side show that accomplishes absolutely nothing. No one even knew it came from a Playboy magasine until this whole "retire Lena" movement.

jtriangle9• 3 years ago

People involved in professional imaging tend to know it's from a playboy magazine.

Nobody cared, and Lena was generally celebrated in that community, still is in fact. No amount of temporary blogger complaining is going to change that because they completely forget the reason that image is used. It is very difficult to reproduce/compress/etc and while it's certainly possible to use alternative images (though the image provided by the original post is a very poor substitute), it's simply easier to use Lena because people know where the problem areas are going to be if something is awry.

zzo38computer6• 3 years ago

This is like GitHub renaming master branch to main branch in an effort to attract more Black Americans to tech. AKA a virtue signaling side show that accomplishes absolutely nothing.

While I think this "virtue signaling" is misguided, that does not necessarily mean that the branch renaming accomplishes nothing. For one thing, "main" is two letters shorter than "master" and starts with the same two letters, but that is a rather minor thing. More important, I think, that they ensured that branch renaming is implemented, since that is a helpful feature.

I had previously (not being familiar with git) been concerned that it might cause problems, using the different default name in git and GitHub, but as it turns out this is not a problem at all. I have uploaded a git repository that uses "trunk" as the default branch name to GitHub, and there are no problems at all; it just works.

Also, they did not automatically change existing repositorites. If they did that, that would be a problem too, but fortunately they did not do that.

No one even knew it came from a Playboy magasine until this whole "retire Lena" movement.

Actually, I think it was well known enough.

jb3689• 3 years ago

This is nothing like master vs. main debate. The photo was unmistakenly cropped from a nude photo and used in research. Do you think Github really was thinking about race when they used master? The link is factual vs. coincidental. I'm personally appalled that an entire industry has never seriously questioned where the photo came from (or questioned it and then shrugged it off).

glitchc• 3 years ago

This cracked me up. Wonderful!

I hadn't realized the original Lenna didn't want her photo used any longer. While she cannot technically force the issue as she doesn't own the photograph, the community should respect her wishes.

crazygringo• 3 years ago

This is the funniest thing I've come across all week.

I want to see this take off for the humor value alone. His expression, his mustache... this is gold!

twodave12• 3 years ago

I was expecting to read some story about criminal exploitation, but this sounds like it's just... completely above-board? As a few other commenters stated, the model hasn't explicitly stated whether she supports the use of the photo or not. Even if she did explicitly come out and say she doesn't like people using it, she doesn't own the rights to it.

I'm fine with (and happy for) people going above and beyond to respect someone else's dignity, but this is less about ethics and more about one person's potential regret over a business transaction. Just because you regret doing a deal doesn't mean others are unethical for benefiting from it. When you're using your own body in a business transaction (of _any kind_) you should really think through the possible consequences. Whether it's getting a tattoo or putting your kids on TV or selling photos to Playboy, those all have ramifications you won't be able to control very well later on.

wahnfrieden2• 3 years ago

you're confused between what's legally permitted vs what's ethical. something being legal doesn't prevent anyone from protesting or doing something about it, even if they had accepted a legal risk.

you're also just wrong about the legal aspect of it and seem unfamiliar with licensing

twodave12• 3 years ago

I don't agree, since she was paid (and presumably she could attempt to buy the rights back if she felt really passionate about this). An example of an actual ethics issue would be e.g. the NCAA barring athletes from profiting from their name, image and likeness for so long.

NovemberWhiskey4• 3 years ago

What's the moral principle at stake here that drives this into the ethical domain?

nemo44x4• 3 years ago

Aren't most of "ethics" just concepts created by existing power structures to justify and maintain their legitimacy? Does loading your opinion with "ethics" make it any more valid?

metalforever• 3 years ago

Hi, I saw your other post about the co op programming collective . I'm having some of the same feelings and i was hoping you would want to tell me about that . If you do , hit me up on discord at metalforever#4052

thepasswordis2• 3 years ago

She wasn't upset at the photo being used, she was upset at the idea that it could discourage women from working for a tech company.

But that isn't universally true either. This is like a conditional hypothetical. If this hypothetically this is causing women to not work for tech companies, then in that case she could hypothetically not like that.

This is somebody (the OP) trying to use a drummed up controversy to promote themselves. It's gross.

smcl4• 3 years ago

I don't think Morten is trying to promote himself any more than any post on a personal blog is, humorous or otherwise. It's not like he is trying to springboard into a modelling career or anything.

To me it seems that he doesn't seriously believe his photo will become the new "Lena", but he is still making a very clear statement: "you can use any other image, in fact here is one that is a drop-in replacement, it has a similar aspect ratio, style and colour balance to the original. You have no excuses now, move on like Lena asked."

mLuby• 3 years ago

May I suggest more empathy for your fellow humans?

We aren't good at weighing long-term consequences, especially when we're young (as in the model's case) or in financial need (IDK if that was a factor here; it wouldn't surprise me).

Contracts between parties of such unequal bargaining power can't be ethically valid IMO, whatever legally validity they may claim.

Likewise, 20y+ contracts involving individuals aren't wise. (Fine for organizations like businesses and governments though.)

O__________O• 3 years ago

> Fine for organizations like businesses and governments though.

Curious, would it be possible for you to expand on this?

To me, if anything, one generation committing to a future that another will be responsible for is just as ethically problematic, if not more, given the overall impact.

NovemberWhiskey4• 3 years ago

You need to consider the possibility that this isn't actually the predominant mores of our society - which sticks closer to "you should stand by your agreements" than "agreements between parties of unequal bargaining power are invalid".

To bring your two examples together: I don't think it's a commonly shared opinion that 30 year mortgages are unethical.

twodave12• 3 years ago

May I instead suggest avoiding asking loaded questions? Nothing I said precludes me from having compassion for this person. My point is that it's just not an ethical concern.

HPsquared2• 3 years ago

Anyone getting married, buying a house or having children enters into a long contract, often at a relatively young age. Are those unwise? (It's arguably the case today, I suppose)

gbanfalvi• 3 years ago

When you're using your own body in a business transaction (of _any kind_) you should really think through the possible consequences.

Yeah, when she was modelling for playboy she should've thought "what if a nerd somewhere takes this photo of me and unknowingly turns it into a commonplace testing asset in an industry niche in 50 years that doesn't even exist in my current time?"

More seriously, the original copyright owner (the photographer? playboy?) probably didn't license it for use as a visual benchmarking asset for graphics algorithms.

HPsquared2• 3 years ago

Does that make it the first instance of Swedish computer piracy?

twodave12• 3 years ago

That class of thinking is exactly what she should have considered, though I'd have phrased it more generally: "These photos will not be under my control, therefore they could show up anywhere at anytime in the future, and there's potentially nothing I can do about it."

NovemberWhiskey4• 3 years ago

More seriously, the original copyright owner (the photographer? playboy?) probably didn't license it for use as a visual benchmarking asset for graphics algorithms.

The rights owner (Playboy, in this case) is on record saying they made a conscious choice not to enforce their rights to this image.

runjake• 3 years ago

As a few other commenters stated, the model hasn't explicitly stated whether she supports the use of the photo or not.

Yes, she has. It's at the bottom of linked article:

    Lena added: “I retired from modelling a long time ago. It’s time I retired from tech, too. 
    We can make a simple change today that creates a lasting change for tomorrow. Let’s commit 
    to losing me.”

dahart7• 3 years ago

She supports the movement (started by other people) to retire the image from tech, but she wasn’t particularly bothered by the use of the photo, she has said so in multiple interviews. “In 1988, she was interviewed by some Swedish computer related publication, and she was pleasantly amused by what had happened to her picture.” http://www.lenna.org/

dahart7• 3 years ago

this is less about ethics and more about one person’s potential regret over a business transaction.

Why do you believe this, and do you have any evidence to support this claim? Are you not aware of the history of this image?

“Retiring Lena as an image used in coding goes beyond copyright, consent or ethics. It is a required step to help women feel more welcome in tech.” https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/it-s-time-to-retire-...

I don’t believe that Lena herself has expressed regret over the business transaction, nor was she even bothered much by the use of the image in tech. I believe I read that Playboy considered action on copyright grounds, but decided not to pursue them. You can verify these things via many sources, the link above contains several, as well as the Wikipedia article on this image. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna#Criticism

This is neither about Lena’s choices nor is it about protecting her dignity. It’s about our choices and protecting our dignity.

twodave12• 3 years ago

Evidence? Why would I need any? There is no unethical origin of that photo, as the article claims there is. The burden isn't on me to prove non-existence, that's silly.

But fair enough, I've clearly missed a bit of context. I think my overall point still stands, though. Though I personally think calling that cropped photo "pornographic" is a stretch, it's not an image I would have selected or personally find appropriate. Truthfully, I didn't even realize it was from Playboy until I clicked a link in the article. It's still not a question of ethical origins vs not.

chasing2• 3 years ago

People who sell photos of their bodies should be allowed to make ethical arguments or have opinions outside the narrow confines of their contracts. Even if those pictures are naked pictures.

twodave12• 3 years ago

They can. It still doesn't make the use or origin of those photos unethical.

jtriangle9• 3 years ago

The picture is not a naked picture, it is a crop of a photo in which the subject is naked, but cropped in such a way that does not portray any nudity.

chasing2• 3 years ago

Just because you regret doing a deal doesn't mean others are unethical for benefiting from it.

Everything else aside, this is simply inaccurate. Contractual deals can totally be unethical for all sorts of reasons. When there’s an extreme power imbalance, for example. As one might see between a very young woman and a large and powerful company.

twodave12• 3 years ago

I didn't say it _can't be_ unethical. I just said it isn't necessarily. Ethics is a fairly narrow definition, and I'm not sure you can apply it as broadly as, "Anytime one party has leverage over another, there's an ethics violation." I'd be willing to consider it, but in this case I don't see where anybody's wishes were explicitly violated or any contract was executed in bad faith...

iaseiadit• 3 years ago

The image is offensive because, as an photo sourced from a “men’s magazine”, it’s a reminder that mostly men worked on developing image compression and jpeg technology in the past, and this could make women feel left out or uncomfortable today. Seems motivated by political correctness, not any actual injustice, but perhaps it is time for a new image after this many years.

peyton• 3 years ago

It’s pretty misinformed to suggest mostly men worked on JPEG technology.

pseudalopex5• 3 years ago

The image is offensive because, as an photo sourced from a “men’s magazine”, it’s a reminder that mostly men worked on developing image compression and jpeg technology in the past, and this could make women feel left out or uncomfortable today.

Where did you get this idea? The continued use of the image in professional contexts discomforts people because the photo and the magazine were created for men's sexual interests. And there is little technical reason to use it now.

drabbiticus10• 3 years ago

It feels like you and many other commenters have missed the broad general point to focus on the proverbial trees. I am replying to this comment because it is at the top of the HN comments at the time of this reply.

It is a part of computing history that computer scientists at a respected educational institution chose to use a cropped version of a nude Playboy image as part of a test suite for the development of JPEG. Part of that history is that in the 1970s someone felt it was appropriate to openly bring a copy of Playboy into the office and the response to that was to use something from it for an image test suite [1]. You are personally welcome to feel about it however you will.

However, many women are stating that the continued inclusion of a Lena image in test suites and as an important part of computing history makes them feel unwelcomed in tech spaces. As a hypothetical, perhaps you are a straight male. Imagine for a moment that computer science was instead historically dominated by gay men, and that they had decided to use images from gay pornography as part of the JPEG test suite. Suppose that gay men continued to be highly represented within the computer science workforce, and that in order to learn about JPEG compression, you also had to be confronted by those images in a computer science lecture hall in 2023 while surrounded as a straight individual by a room full of gay men. Suppose you hear even one classmate who feels comfortable, in this professional setting, commenting that "they could use some company like that around here" and hearing a few classmates chuckle around that.

Computing and computing literacy are such useful skills today. There are a myriad of tasks where even basic programming literacy would allow you to automate things and make you more efficient in your endeavors. More broadly as a society, we are leveraging machine learning models in so many contexts, and these have been shown to encode the societal biases which were present in their training sets. Representation across all axes of identity allow everyone an equal footing to advance in this technical skillset and also increases the chances that we identify when computing technologies are encoding bias in harmful ways. These women are saying that there are many things which can be done to improve the representation of women within tech spaces, and that removing Lena from curriculums and test suites does zero technical harm while increasing inclusivity. That is the ethical judgement at stake - to what extent do our current practices harm inclusivity and affect the likelihood of encoding harmful biases in the technology we develop now and in the future?

[minor point - if you are a legal stickler, use of the Lena image was also done in infringement of copyright. This is such a non-point in the actual discussion of the campaign, but it seems like a lot of comments basically fall along the line of "this is legal so whatever" and if you want to argue on this perceived technicality, it isn't even correct.]

[1] http://www.lenna.org/pcs_mirror/may_june01.pdf

chillingeffect5• 3 years ago

Imagine for a moment that computer science was instead historically dominated by gay men, and that they had decided to use images from gay pornography as part of the JPEG test suite.

Mott and Bailey. This image is not pornography. It's a tasteful head shot. You're introducing any discussion of pornography.

[minor point - if you are a legal stickler, use of the Lena image was also done in infringement of copyright.

If you are a legal stickler, or even just support basic rights, fair use is integral to the research process. [1]

[1] https://lib.asu.edu/news/research/why-does-fair-use-matter-r...

throw0095• 3 years ago

As a hypothetical, perhaps you are a straight male. Imagine for a moment that computer science was instead historically dominated by gay men, and that they had decided to use images from gay pornography as part of the JPEG test suite.

If a straight man was to complain about too much gayness in the work place it would be a hate crime.

cynicalsecurity• 3 years ago

It's astonishing how a supposedly liberal and tolerant society is so much hateful towards eroticism it considers the Lena pic originating from a PlayBoy magazine to have a "troubled" origin.

jonnycomputer• 3 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_views_on_sexuality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_views_on_prostitution

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminist-sex-markets/

that said, its considered problematic, or troubled, not because its erotica, but because a group of men used a photo of that nature as the test image. some could, and some probably do, consider that to be objectifying women, particularly when the field is so dominated by men that women may feel that it signals that their worth is judged by their sexual appeal more than their technical skills. and, i could well imagine how I might feel in that situation.

however, there is also something to this that feels overwrought, or perhaps even like a little old-fashioned prudishness.

plank• 3 years ago

This. Funny how this seemingly clear point doesn’t get across to the other side of the debate (this discussion, more then others, seem to divide the group into two sides: one that sees why using Lena can be considered troubled, and one that does not). I find this difficult to understand.

antibasilisk• 3 years ago

don't you think it's a little odd to use a porno crop in a professional environment? i would rightfully be fired immediately if i demoed something to client using a belle delphine crop. Lena is only given a pass due to tradition

mock-possum5• 3 years ago

So imagine sitting around with your coworkers, and one of your teammates raises his hand and says, "I think we should use this naked picture of a hot white chick as reference imagery."

How does that make you feel? It would sketch me the fuck out.

In all fairness, would I react differently if it was a cute asian dude with a big dick? No, honestly, I would still be sketched out by it, and I like cute asian dudes with big dicks. I just don't feel comfortable indulging my sexual interests in the workplace, and I don't think that's a particularly controversial position. It has nothing to do with 'liberal' or 'tolerant society.'

jtriangle9• 3 years ago

"I think we should use this naked picture of a hot white chick as reference imagery"

Lena is not visibly naked in the reference imagery, so, your point is moot. It was always a cropped image, and it was cropped for exactly the reasons you outlined. If you, or others, cannot look at Lena without sexualizing her, that isn't the fault of the image, that's the fault of the viewer.

Lena was used because that image is very difficult to reproduce/compress/etc, and that has not changed.

zzo38computer6• 3 years ago

How does that make you feel? It would sketch me the fuck out.

I would also not like it right away, but I would be willing to listen to their reasons for it.

I don't like pornography (whether it is a "naked picture of a hot white chick" or a "cute asian dude with a big dick"), and also don't intend to indulge sexual interests in the workplace, but what is need in this case is to know which collections of pictures are more helpful for testing digital image processing. And, anyways the picture is cropped.

(However, I think that for test images, it is better to have a variety of pictures to use for testing instead of only one. They should not all be photographs of people, either, although it is helpful if some of them are.)

jaclaz2• 3 years ago

Side note: https://sipi.usc.edu/database/database.php?volume=misc&image...

Please note that we no longer distribute the following images that were previously available in our database: 4.2.04 (lena), 4.2.02 (tiffany), elaine.512, numbers.512 and testpat.1k. Although these images have played a significant role in the history of image processing, they no longer represent the best examples for future research.

What are the reasons for not distributing anymore the other ones?

super2564• 3 years ago

What are the reasons for not distributing anymore the other ones?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19182497

jaclaz2• 3 years ago

Yep, thanks, still we don't know if it was because they are (now) considered somehow offensive of women or if it was because (even if protection was not enforced) they are copyrighted.

Or simply because they were sourced from Playboy magazine (which in itself is now deemed ethically questionable).

The statement on the page seems to me meaningless:

they no longer represent the best examples for future research.

without the actual reason why they "no longer represent", which BTW implies that for some time (30 or 40 years + ) they actually were "the best examples".

TheGeminon• 3 years ago

Took a look at them in Wayback, and the images of other women look similarly styled (could be other models?), and the numbers and testpat images use the Lena image as part of them.

bombcar• 3 years ago

Based on a cursory google search, they are apparently all similarly "sourced" (and testpat includes lena).

zokier• 3 years ago

I'm just imagining someone in 50 years time trying to figure out why we are using picture of naked man posing with a hat complete with purple plume as reference for image processing.

That being said, is the Lena picture still being frequently used? Because I don't recall seeing it that often lately anymore

super2564• 3 years ago

That being said, is the Lena picture still being frequently used? Because I don't recall seeing it that often lately anymore

It's not part of the SIPI image db since 2017/2018; hence it is getting less frequently used. Probably only by researchers, who didn't update their copy in the last 5-6 years.

throw7• 3 years ago

"making it clear that we won’t accept the unintended biases of the past"

Who is we? And who made them the arbiter of biases, unintended and intended?

omnibrain• 3 years ago

About 10-12 years ago a (female) friend of mine went to a "slutwalk". Slutwaks were a precursor to the "#MeToo movement". She carried a sign with a short slogan and got captured by a press fotographer. The photo went into the press foto agencys and for a time almost every article in germany about sexism used it for illustration. Even some international publication picked the foto up.

After a while she tried to contact them and tell them, that she wants her face back. But it was always difficult to get them to drop the foto.

I google it from time to time and even in 2020 the foto still got used.

thepasswordis2• 3 years ago

Can we please just have some things with some soul? This is a cute photo, the model in the photo has said she thinks is cool and kindof funny that it has been used for image research, the story is kindof cute and funny, and it's just...all around wholesome.

The people who want to get rid of this stuff are sad. The world does not need to be a soulless, beige, featureless, boring slurry of boring featureless HR spoken nonsense. The Lena picture and the entire story around it is about the most harmless thing imaginable.

panki27• 3 years ago

She said: “I retired from modelling a long time ago. It’s time I retired from tech, too. We can make a simple change today that creates a lasting change for tomorrow. Let’s commit to losing me.”

https://www.thedrum.com/news/2019/11/19/gender-equality-ad-c...

luckylion5• 3 years ago

Yes, after like 50 years of saying the opposite, including a few months before that statement was given. It looks like a SJW campaign approached her about it to make some noise but didn't really bother enough to keep their website secured with a valid SSL certificate.

estebank• 3 years ago

This new picture is in conversation with the older one, acknowledging its legacy while also making a statement. Is there anything about the new picture that is souless, beige, featureless or boring?

mock-possum5• 3 years ago

yeah but think it through - what kind of 'soul' is there in this story, when you really dig down to the bottom of it, eh?

Cropped nude pinups aren't really what I'd call 'wholesome' - and the prospect of being in a room full of people working off that reference image doesn't really sound too comfortable to me.

Additionally: we all know there's a reason it's a naked white cis girl's butt. Change any of those attributes and it immediately becomes less sexually arousing to most straight men. Is that really the kind of 'soul' you're looking for? it's trite at best.

jtriangle9• 3 years ago

If someone can't look at a very cropped picture of a woman without sexualizing her, they need to evaluate how they think about women. That, and that alone, is the problem here.

chillingeffect5• 3 years ago

who is in this picture? how do we know this is ethically-sourced? is this revenge-porn by an angry ex of person in the picture?

drabbiticus10• 3 years ago

Low-effort FUD. This is an image of the author, who is a tenure track assistant professor in Denmark. Your comment is not constructive, is not based on any evidence, and can be addressed through simply clinking through 1 link in the OP.

zzo38computer6• 3 years ago

This is an image of the author

It is confusing. They called the picture file "Lena" even though the author's name is not Lena.

1970-01-01• 3 years ago

This is good fun, however we really need multiracial Lenas with varied skin tones.

jtriangle9• 3 years ago

We have this already actually. Not quite up-to-date on the current hotness, but, we've used a set of images called "the roman 16" which accomplishes exactly that and more.

They're not really used for compression testing inasmuch as they're used to evaluate output quality of various imaging devices/workflows/etc

throwaway9203332• 3 years ago

It used to make no sense to me how people would put so much effort into things like this that don’t matter. Yes, the photo is originally from Playboy, but most people don’t even know that because it’s cropped. It’s just a picture of a woman’s face.

This and things like renaming master to main I now see as examples of the foot-in-the-door strategy[1]. Get people and teams to agree to a small request like changing their test image, and then they will be more likely to go along with big changes later, because they have publicly expressed support for diversity goals and they have a psychological need to remain consistent in their actions (avoid cognitive dissonance)

[1] https://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/...

whamlastxmas2• 3 years ago

This is a slippery slope fallacy

throwaway9203332• 3 years ago

You can call it a fallacy, but it's scientifically proven to work (see the reference in the parent comment).

hristov• 3 years ago

So if the "troubled origin" of the Lena picture is the fact that she was nude (yet the picture used for computer science was cropped and did not use any of the nude parts) then why should the replacement be another photo that suggests it is a cropped nude?

Is it the fact that the original Lena picture was pretty and alluring and this one is gross, that makes it "ethically sourced"? Or is that a bad joke? I hope the author realizes that using men in drag as a punchline is also not considered to be socially acceptable nowadays.

The criticism of using the Lena picture for computer science is fair. Pictures for image compression science should be based on more ordinary non-sexual images. Multiple images of people of different color skins, and clothing styles should be used because nowadays it is very easy to over-tune your compression algorithm to a specific type of image or skin tone.

But let us be clear about what exactly is wrong with the Lena picture. It is the fact that a sexual image is being pushed to people that do not want to see a sexual image but merely want to study computer science. This is not going to get fixed by pushing another sexual image to people that do not want to see it.

Feminists say that it is problematic to flood society with sexualized images of women to the point where it is suggested that women are good for sex only. I agree. But there is nothing inherently wrong with taking pictures of women or taking sexy pictures of nude women. Some women like having their pictures taken. Lena Forsen was perfectly willing to get her nude picture taken by playboy.

In perfectly consensual setting taking sexy photos is perfectly fine. Many people enjoy taking them, many people enjoy being in them, many people enjoy looking at them. And it is not some kind of sign of male chauvinism either. I know that because many men like to have sexualized nude pictures taken of them, and they also like to trick me into looking at them even though I do not want to.

And that is the problem, with sexual pictures. When they are forced on to people that they do not want to look at them. So sorry for whoever took this picture, I do not want to look at it. It grosses me out. And I do not appreciate you trying to trick me into looking at it. Your reasoning about providing an ethical alternative to the Lena picture is paper thin and false. If you wanted to provide an ethical alternative, you would be fully clothed.

You are just another exhibitionist that gets a thrill of having many strangers look at sexually suggestive pictures of themselves. Good for you. But try to push your pictures at people that may enjoy looking at them. I don't.

zzo38computer6• 3 years ago

Multiple images of people of different color skins, and clothing styles should be used because nowadays it is very easy to over-tune your compression algorithm to a specific type of image or skin tone.

This is true. I have mentioned using different pictures to ensure not over-tuned for only one picture (I did not use those words, but thank you for mentioning, a better way to mention it). Different colours of skins and different clothing styles is one thing, but furthermore, you should not be limited to pictures of people, either (although some of them should be pictures of people, but not all of them); there are other living and non-living things to take pictures of, too.

iameli3• 3 years ago

Lena has said, in the linked video, that she would prefer her picture stop being used in this way. That ought be a sufficient condition for us, as developers, to stop using it. I'm distressed to find comment threads here are talking about copyright or complaining about "virtue signalling." You don't have to agree with her to respect her wishes.

jtriangle9• 3 years ago

You're also under no obligation to respect her wishes. Not that long ago she was happy that her likeness had gained celebrity status, and has recently changed her mind (a little).

If you wish to be subject to the whims of someone that you don't know, and likely never will know, feel free. Sounds exhausting.

iameli3• 3 years ago

We're rarely under any obligation whatsoever to be kind, or empathetic, or caring, or socially conscious. Nonetheless, I aspire to be those things. So if I were writing a JPEG encoder, and I'm picking a test image, I could:

1. Use the Lenna, which originates from Playboy, which Wikipedia describes as controversial "on both technical and social grounds, and many journals have discouraged or banned its use", and where the subject in question has recently requested to cease its use, or

2. Use anything else.

I'd choose 2. Seems like an easy decision.

SergeAx2• 3 years ago

I can't really tell anymore if this is ironic or not.

SergeAx2• 3 years ago

By the way, given that porn industry was and still partially is a serious driver of Internet development, using original female nude as a benchmark for compression quality was more than justified.

jacobriis2• 3 years ago

Is the problem that the photo is cropped from a woman who is nude or that the woman is beautiful or that a photo of a woman would be used at all?

I watched the documentary produced by the campaign Losing Lena (https://www.facebook.com/codelikeagirlau/videos/985614161797...) here are the complaints:

1) Female student says high school students made jokes about the photo and made her feel that women were made to be a joke

2) Female researcher says when the photo goes up on a screen "everyone laughs.... well not everyone"

3) Female math professor says the photo symbolizes the role women played in technology: "beautiful young woman in the photograph not the one doing the coding"

mock-possum5• 3 years ago

Yeah, all three points are basically the same thing - exclusion / lack of inclusion. They could have chosen any photo, and they picked one that specifically depicted a naked white woman, primarily aimed at sexual gratification for straight men.

jacobriis2• 3 years ago

Beware of fine arts museums.

luckylion5• 3 years ago

Change the photo. In a few months, you'll have another campaign by the same group saying how "they are erasing women from computer history and replacing them with men. They are literally annihilating us."

globular-toast• 3 years ago

I find it funny how people aren't even sure what is wrong with the original image. There seem to be at least three reasons:

(1) The image itself is somehow unethically sourced, as seems to be implied here,

(2) The subject in the image doesn't wish for it to be used in such a way,

(3) The image excludes women from computer science.

I don't see any evidence for any of them. It seems to me this image just makes some people uncomfortable but they are not sure why so they just make up pseudo-logical reasons for it. It's OK to say that something just doesn't feel right. I wish people would just do that. Things don't always have to be logical. If we all agree we don't like it then we shouldn't do it.

I do wonder why people feel bad about this all of a sudden, though.

graderjs• 3 years ago

5 years later women will be penning blog posts about "retaking Lena" - reclaiming women's place and free expression by re-appropriating an image maligned by a virtual signalling patriarchy (or misguided but mostly well-intentioned women misled by the same), and inferring that Jpeg's original female patron--and her empowering yet threatening-to-male sexuality--were unjustly silenced and written out of the history of the epochal format, in a sad yet common motif aligned with the history of sciences worldwide.

Lena's reappropriative reestablishment will be a clarion call for progress of women in computer science. After they light the fire, clean-looking male CS professors and open-sorcerer's with cute beards (who by then will have traded in the preferred pronouns blazon of woke supremacy with something even 'cooler') will join the call and show their women-saving prowess (because they definitely need their saving)--by replacing their profile pictures with those of Lena, or photoshopping themselves in miniature aside Lena in ancient-Egyptian-worshipper-to-divine-goddess style. And so the perverted cycle, of ethically priapismic virtue signaling, continues. I guess sexual selection in information society is destined to lead to ever more tumescently elaborate yet essentially idempotent/useless displays of...whatever this is.

But, nice pic. I particularly like how he's captured the smile, given it his own twist, and the dash of magnetic charm leaping out of his eyes is set off by his moustache. He he haw. ;p ;) xx;p

zzo38computer6• 3 years ago

I think that, when working with digital image processing, it is helpful to have a variety of pictures (photographs of different things (some of which are pictures of people, and some of which aren't), both landscape and portrait orientation (some algorithms might work better one way or other), art, line drawings, pictures drawn by computer, colours, monochrome, etc) to test with.

Wikipedia says about the Lena picture: "David C. Munson, editor-in-chief of IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, stated that it was a good test image because of its detail, flat regions, shading, and texture." Wikipedia also mentions: "In today’s age of high-resolution digital image technology, it seems difficult to argue that a 512 × 512 image produced with a 1970s-era analog scanner is the best we have to offer as an image quality test standard." So, there are valid arguments both ways, relating to the use of the picture.

pseudalopex5• 3 years ago

Munson advised authors use a different image if they could. And suggested more variety would produce better compression.[1]

[1] http://www.lenna.org/editor.html

Ethically Sourced Lena Picture

Related Stories