Creation Events
An article in New Scientist, Photo recognition software gives location, discusses a project by two Cambridge researchers able to discern location based on a picture of surrounding buildings taken by a camera-phone. In explaining how the system analyzes pictures, we’re told:
This transforms the picture into one that was taken square on, rather than at an angle.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I find the use of “taken” in this sense rather absurd. Transforming the image after it is sent across the network for analysis does nothing to the alter the now-passed creation event. If the picture was taken “at an angle,” applying transformations to a digital representation of the picture to make it appear as if it were “taken square on” doesn’t change the fact that it was, in fact, taken “at an angle”. I want to believe this isn’t a case of lazy writing, but I can’t fathom how anyone could believe what the sentence above suggests is happening.
Comments
I think for explaining what the software does, this is the simplest way to phrase it. What other language would you suggest? (I hope you don’t come up with anything good - it’s 2 am, I just got home, am a bit drunk, and can’t think of anything myself). Only think I can think of is “as if the photos were taken on a level horizon with the buildings appearing at a 90 degree angle to the horizon…”
If the reference photos used were “taken square on,” then in order to do real comparisons and determine a location, it is feasible to imagine that any submitted photos would have to be aligned in this manner before analysis and comparison could be carried out.
Maybe I’m just too drunk and tired, but I don’t understand your objection.
Posted by: Traveler on April 13th, 2004 11:03 PMI was also going to say that maybe the writer was just English, but then expression would be “taken head on” and would still only imply “standing directly in front of” without commenting on the vertical angle of the picture.
Posted by: Traveler on April 13th, 2004 11:05 PMI fear you’ve completely missed my point. Something like this would have been acceptable:
Posted by: kasei on April 14th, 2004 11:51 AMThis transforms the picture into one that appears as if it had been taken square on, rather than at an angle.
Grammatically analyzing a science article. Truly, you are a liberal arts graduate.
“This thinking outside the box synergizes my paradigm!”
Posted by: Benjamin on April 13th, 2004 6:55 PM