Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientists Create Easier Way To Embed Objects Into Video

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the advertising-agency-wet-dream dept.

Ashutosh Saxena writes "Stanford artificial intelligence researchers have developed software that makes it easy to reach inside an existing video and place a photo on the wall so realistically that it looks like it was there from the beginning. The photo is not pasted on top of the existing video, but embedded in it. It works for videos as well — you can play a video on a wall inside your video. The technology can cheaply do some of the tricks normally performed by expensive commercial editing systems. The researchers suggest that anyone with a video camera might earn some spending money by agreeing to have unobtrusive corporate logos placed inside their videos before they are posted online."

11 of 236 comments (clear)

  1. Youtube by TBoon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I thought there was more than enough advertisement on YouTube as it was already.

    1. Re:Youtube by DarthJohn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I thought there was more than enough advertisement on YouTube as it was already.

      But not in our dreams! Nosiree!

  2. Yeah, that'll work by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The researchers suggest that anyone with a video camera might earn some spending money by agreeing to have unobtrusive corporate logos placed inside their videos before they are posted online.

    Just like web surfers no longer even glance at banner ads anymore, people will learn to ignore any corporate logos in videos (even if they really ARE there in real life!).

  3. The death of advertising by StrategicIrony · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does anyone notice that the more pervasive advertising is, the less effective it is?

    In other words, people build filters for it. I know within younger generations, advertising is almost invisible.

    I recall older people at work asking me "did you notice that new ad on the webpage?"

    To which I responded "uhm... our webpage has ads?"

    Because I spend enough time on the web to have almost totally filtered them out (yeah, adblock does a bunch of that for me, but even without it....)

    I don't think I could tell you after a TV show, who the sponsors were. Commercial time is just blank in my mind because I tune it out.

    I don't think I've EVER clicked on an ad in a webpage. I don't know for sure, but television and radio advertising rarely affect my purchasing decisions, at least not in a way I can discern.

    So, legitimately, how powerful is a wall-hanging logo for Pepsi in some random goofy youtube video ACTUALLY going to be?

    Am I a total oddity in not even noticing most advertising?

    1. Re:The death of advertising by StrategicIrony · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Probably.

      I saw ads for the new Nikon camera, which reminded me I had meant to drop by the local camera shop because It was something I'd been wanting to do (upgrade my camera)

      I ended up doing some research and bought a Canon from an online discount shop.

      Yay for Nikon ads.

  4. It will, and does by LockeOnLogic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Modern advertising/branding isn't about actively convincing you anymore. It's about creating a pervasive environment of exposure in which you become familiar with a brand/product/logo whatever. In the store people are then more likely to subconsciously reach for Tide or Tylenol (despite the fact that generics are composed of essentially the same active ingredients) because they are familiar.

    Nobody pays much attention to TV commercials anymore, and haven't for some time. Have advertisers markedly decreased their buying of TV commercial time? No, because you don't have to pay attention for it to work.

    1. Re:It will, and does by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's about creating a pervasive environment of exposure

      Also an effective way to brainwash a person too.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    2. Re:It will, and does by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've noticed that ads are being chained to increase effectiveness.

      For example, The SNL episode featuring the fake Sarah Palin had a later skit which showcased the MS Surface technology, then showed the Microsoft ads during the commercial breaks. Another show featured a very distinctive necklace worn by some lade ghost in a mirror on some chick show, and coincidentally the exact same necklace was featured in a commercial which sold them for some kind of real-life charity.

    3. Re:It will, and does by undertow3886 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Interesting, you admit you're outside the bell curve and then expect corporations to learn from your example? I think it'd be more worth it to them to pay attention to the middle of that bell curve. :-)

      You know well why they'll keep doing stuff like the rootkit thing. Most people don't care, and the ones who do aren't present in large enough numbers for them to change their strategy.

      --
      Sick of people knocking on Gentoo's greatness in completely unrelated .sigs? Me too!
  5. A few points of note: by xquark · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1. Initially from a computer forensics pov, it would be trivial to detect if a video has been altered, however i think with further improvements in the embedding technology where the actual advert piece is better rendered to take into account surrounding lighting conditions it might become more difficult, however not impossible to detect intentional modifications

    2. Just as with current browser ad-blockers, the these ads can also be blocked out, in-fact the technology proves that complex camera conditions such as rotational pan(the heros examples) and occlusion (fat chick on couch) can be easily determined, so creating a blank out mask of a texture that is close to the surrounding surface would also be quiet doable, perhaps not real-time at the moment, but doable nonetheless, and most definitely live sometime in the future perhaps.

    --
    Arash Partow's Philosophy: Be a person who knows what they don't know, and not a person who doesn't know.
  6. Re:Generics by StrategicIrony · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There are cases for generic and cases for non-generic.

    There's nothing to say that brands are evil, just that brands with heavy advertising aren't necessarily more worthy of a purchase.

    When it comes to drugs, generics actually ARE composed of essentially the same thing, but when it comes to card or liquor or computer parts, "generics" are definitely not.

    However, purchasing a car bumper because the TV showed a hot woman rubbing on it is different than purchasing it because it's a superior product.

    That's the contention this whole thread. Some people seem to think that advertising legitimately will make me pay more for an identical or inferior product, without my conscious knowledge, which I have argued as a bit of bunk, at least the enormous majority of the time, for me personally.