
Keegan – Personal photo coach - p4bl0
https://keegan.regaind.io/
======
guessmyname
So... I am a pro-photographer ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
[https://i.imgur.com/yBCXOpe.png](https://i.imgur.com/yBCXOpe.png)

~~~
iXce
Well done :p gaming AI systems is always great fun ^^

~~~
bambax
Red circle on black, 7.7:

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/8OerASkBTWupl7srWfFYrg](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/8OerASkBTWupl7srWfFYrg)

~~~
bambax
Full red gets only 1.9 but... 82% in composition!

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/c5Vyyn4ZRsKJ4cvS_KYHXg](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/c5Vyyn4ZRsKJ4cvS_KYHXg)

------
fauria
_" You need to invest in some studio lighting… The pic is not very
interesting… It's flawed, but you'll get there: keep working on your lighting,
framing, and composition. It's only a 3.2/10."_

Uploaded the second picture of this fantastic set by a 1950's photographer
from Hong Kong: [http://designyoutrust.com/2016/02/hong-kong-in-
the-1950s-cap...](http://designyoutrust.com/2016/02/hong-kong-in-
the-1950s-captured-by-a-teenager/)

Many of them get labeled as _#badcolors_ or _#boring_ , I guess it might be
related to the lack of color features...

~~~
p4bl0
I think the fact that the AI is developed by Regaind
([https://regaind.io/](https://regaind.io/)) must be taken into account. Their
service is not intended for artsy pictures. It is rather targeted at people
who have 1000 photos on their reflex from their last vacations and want to
make a relevant and beautiful album of 50 photos to remember their trip, but
don't want to spend two weeks comparing and selecting the right ones.

See for instance their demo here :
[https://regaind.io/demo/](https://regaind.io/demo/).

~~~
usrusr
In my experience, even amongst vacation snapshots, the best tend to be of the
accidentally artsy variety. I suppose this algorithm would completely fail to
recognize the hilarity of the mirroring sphere of a tourist's perfectly
bowling-ball-bald head in front of an apse, hovering under the blob of light
that is the eye of the pantheon dome on a phone snap. I know I did, (miss it)
on the first few times I scrolled through the series.

Generally I feel tempted to file this site under fun with phrase generators,
with some ML thrown in to make it slightly more interesting than purely random
phrase generator toys. But are there really no use cases for automated checks
of aesthetic conventions? Sifting through the data dump of a full day of
wedding shots maybe? I know I would be tempted to start with a computer
generated shortlist. Mate it with face detection so that you can cluster by
subset of attendees (each combination of faces captured must be present at
least once in the final set) and... well I guess they already use systems like
that, it's 2016.

An entirely unrelated idea in the general area of photography, algorithms and
human learning that I still miss is this: an option in manual mode that takes
a full auto shot right after the manual one, exposing how good or bad the
algorithms are vs the operator. Or do some cameras have something like that?
Do manufacturers omit it to not expose deficiencies in their algorithms? Do
they omit it to not hurt the feelings of customers when they are worse than
auto mode?

~~~
iXce
This is indeed a "fun" project which showcases the technology and provides (I
think) fairly relevant comments (trust me - a random generator is _much_
worse, we had terrible comments at the beginning of the project). The other
technology modules you describe (face recognition etc) are indeed requirements
for a semi or fully automated curation system.

------
iXce
Hey there! I'm Regaind's CTO and will be happy to answer your questions :) We
built this as a coaching tool aimed at helping amateurs take better photos, in
the context of building a smart and flexible automatic roll curation system
that goes beyond the "bad exposition/motion blur detection" that's often used.
The end goal is to fluidify the use of photos by killing the last bottleneck:
sorting.

~~~
balls187
I haven't seen any comments that I would classify as coaching. Instead they
seem to be simple critiques.

"Overall, this image is good, but it could be great."
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/whFZsOsRRfG4sRBGCDiA7g](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/whFZsOsRRfG4sRBGCDiA7g)

"The blur and the subject together, so good. "
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/HopS2XrnSmGhXiMg6AFoLA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/HopS2XrnSmGhXiMg6AFoLA)

"This is a solid image." [https://keegan.regaind.io/p/USKPgJgfRE-
h_n7rh2QnHg](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/USKPgJgfRE-h_n7rh2QnHg)

"So simple, but so good"
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/xbQHksWyRsOPWhW3hhs6RA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/xbQHksWyRsOPWhW3hhs6RA)

Don't get me wrong, I think this is pretty cool, but there is no real
actionable feedback, so there unless you can guess as to what triggers the
higher scores, there isn't much coaching, so much as "gaming" the AI.

~~~
iXce
Hey there, Coaching/advice is provided when you score much lower than that! We
kinda don't take the risk of telling you "improve your composition" when the
overall picture looks good and the non-standard composition may actually be
what makes it work so well. Just a few examples with coaching:
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/ne5Xql3LQ4Wcp3lNTwpA3A](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/ne5Xql3LQ4Wcp3lNTwpA3A)
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/JAi7xXNsSw6CLzALqmdNpQ](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/JAi7xXNsSw6CLzALqmdNpQ)
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/RA1BIfwLTwmdo44ACxsctg](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/RA1BIfwLTwmdo44ACxsctg)

~~~
balls187
Makes sense.

My bias as an Asian American: I translate a 7.4 to a 74/100 to a C, which is
not a good grade, hence a desire to see coaching to achieve a score of 9.8 and
above.

------
SCdF
Definitely fun to play with. Seems to really like bokeh...

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/sqs8Z8RgSsuaSG3gLxo0bQ](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/sqs8Z8RgSsuaSG3gLxo0bQ)

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/dNMYqs3aSpa_x0fYMU_AhA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/dNMYqs3aSpa_x0fYMU_AhA)

I'm not really seeing it couching me though:

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/6QD0ycG3QTK1uM2IbIslSw](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/6QD0ycG3QTK1uM2IbIslSw)

"This landscape is good, but could be great". Not really sure what to do with
that.

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/lhCz67aBTnmI5GB9sWO4cQ](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/lhCz67aBTnmI5GB9sWO4cQ)

Seems like a low score. Again though, it's not really clear why. "Bad
lighting" seems odd, because maybe I have no taste but the lighting is the
reason for the shot in the first place. For reference, here's the original:
[https://www.flickr.com/photos/stefandufresne/16091643487/in/...](https://www.flickr.com/photos/stefandufresne/16091643487/in/album-72157649893805028/)

So far, AFAICT, it is a big fan of single focus thing in foreground with lots
of blur in the background.

Edit: I'm having trouble getting it to ever like black and white shots:
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/-NZR7e1FTJGtpMN3BPYlAg](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/-NZR7e1FTJGtpMN3BPYlAg)

Edit 2: Okay whaaaaaaatttt I'm really disagreeing with a lot here. Maybe I
just think some of my shots are better than they really are, but 4.1 for this
is crazy
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/y3LaI_J0R6a33eJ_fOQfew](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/y3LaI_J0R6a33eJ_fOQfew)

~~~
dr_zoidberg
Indeed, my seashell-in-the-sand picture with lots of blur got a 9.2. Also most
of the hall of fame is subject+blur.

Didn't try B&W yet, don't have many pictures like that.

------
jscheel
Algorithm seems to really like portraits. Every one I uploaded, it scored very
highly. Threw in Afghan Girl by Steve McCurry
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/yBJXfxHeTEWtvtGDxgupaA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/yBJXfxHeTEWtvtGDxgupaA)
to see what would happen.

~~~
faitswulff
That's been my experience as well. It must use face detection rather heavily.
It also doesn't like photos with no central subject.

~~~
iXce
Actually there's absolutely _no_ face detection in there !

~~~
bambax
But it loves contrast, no? Global contrast as well as local contrast.

~~~
bambax
Normal BW portrait, 8.5:

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/YLzqGGvuSFOv7PwLl8qC8A](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/YLzqGGvuSFOv7PwLl8qC8A)

Same image with clarity upped to 100% (horrible, IMHO), 8.6:

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/JbMQUyfBTNuoAWveabPCwg](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/JbMQUyfBTNuoAWveabPCwg)

~~~
iXce
It does like contrast! Hm, the score change is sufficiently low to be within
the error bars I'd say. I agree that the upped clarity is less beautiful, but
it adds a nice touch of sharpness which Keegan likes a lot as well!

------
mc32
When I have time later, I might feed it some images from the Magnum (the
agency) corpus and see what feedback I get.

Once upon a time, in certain newbie photo critique forums, pranksters would
upload a renowned photographers image for critique... Hilarious feedback from
new photographers showing off their critiquing prowess.

~~~
willis77
I tried an Ansel Adams photo - "This landscape is good, but it could be great.
Let's give it a 7.5/10"

~~~
mc32
Adams was a pretty straight forward photographer, so I suspect his example
might fare better than say a Winogrand or D'Agata, for example.

------
danesparza
I'm impressed with the ability to recognize different scenes and subject
matters. There are achievements that include photographing waterfalls and
beaches! How cool is this?

Side note: Is this bot on Facebook Messenger as well? Or did I misunderstand?

~~~
p4bl0
Yes it is, you can talk to Keegan here:
[https://www.facebook.com/keeganregaind](https://www.facebook.com/keeganregaind)
:).

------
groby_b
Yeah... No. Not yet.

1) It utterly fails as a coaching tool. "Your framing is 71% correct". Great.
Awesome. That's maybe technically correct (the best kind!), but it's utterly
unhelpful.

2) It fails at images taken to capture a mood instead of a motif. (Exactly
what I'd expect from ML :)

3) It has problems with things that we usually consider iconic photos. Annie
Leibovitz's picture of Mick Jagger in an elevator? Meh, 5.2. Dorothea Lange's
"Migrant Mother" gets at least a 7.6, so on par with my vacation selfies.

It's a great idea. It needs a lot of love.

~~~
iXce
A few answers :)

1) as I mentioned elsewhere, the explicit coaching happens when you submit a
photo that Keegan think is bad (say score < 5).

2) Mostly true, except that it's surprisingly good at capturing the notion of
good timing, which I did not expect from ML ^^

3) well, as for the Mick Jagger picture, I can see why Keegan dislikes it:
it's simply not that good technically. What makes it great is that it's Mick
Jagger and that he has a very deep sight (imho), which the model indeed does
not capture. For the other picture, yeah, the score is not that good, but the
comment is spot on (in my humble and very biased opinion) :p

Thanks for the feedback, and yeah, definitely needs more love before it's a
perfect predictor! Nicely enough, classification tasks with tons of
supervision still make a lot of errors too ^^
([http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdOxQRbWAAEUZM6.jpg](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdOxQRbWAAEUZM6.jpg))

------
sleek
10/10 [https://keegan.regaind.io/p/yCcgM4AJRZ-
mnsVmpPhSbA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/yCcgM4AJRZ-mnsVmpPhSbA)

~~~
jrockway
That is pretty amazing. I'm not sure why your post got flagged. Are people
that afraid of the word "dicks"? Have they not heard the meme?

------
pbhjpbhj
9.9/10
([https://keegan.regaind.io/p/9KfI67VdTGin64pOzN696g](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/9KfI67VdTGin64pOzN696g))
- funny how a quick glance at the Hall of Fame and my brain can work out which
of my pictures will match the preferred style in order to get a high score
pretty readily.

I do wonder if it's a bit sycophantic, after all who wants to be told they're
terrible all the time.

------
dddrh
To me, Keegan misses out on the art of photography and is focusing more on the
"rules" of photography.

That being said, it's fun to see where photos fall in its grading system, even
if I personally disagree with it.

For example, this portrait by Vivian Maier gets a 4.2
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/9VJdlageRTusSf7Z2qDQPA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/9VJdlageRTusSf7Z2qDQPA)

~~~
throwawayReply
If you click the slightly hidden "get more feedback" button it shows:

Subject well framed: 100% Super sharp subject: 71% Great composition: 68%
Pleasant blur: 57% Great lightning: 35% Well chosen background: 33%
Interesting/original subject: 32% Good timing: 26%

So it's not very happy with half the categories but scores 9.4/10, so the
score is definitely not an unweighted mean! (geometric or arithmetic).

~~~
iXce
Thanks for the feedback! Any tip on how to make that button more salient?

~~~
christianmann
It looks like a dropdown / <select> box.

------
kendallpark
Trying to figure out how to make a comparison of this to Professor Oak's photo
critique in Pokemon Snap without beckoning all the HN downvotes...

"Well done!"

------
jordanlev
"Great color and amazing angle. It's okay, but I want to see more; keep
working on your composition! A solid 5.7/10\. Not bad, but I'm sure you can do
better!"

How the heck is this feedback supposed to be useful / helpful / actionable?

------
lightbyte
Uploaded the 2016 Pulitzer Prize photograph of migrants from Turkey landing on
Lesbos in October after battling rough seas:

 _...This photo is alright! I give you a 7.1 /10\. That's a very decent photo
for a start! Can you show me something even better?_

~~~
dingaling
That's a great example of the 'third element': composition, exposure and
_opportunity_.

Sometimes you can make opportunity "happen" through equipment with more reach
or foreknolwedge. But sometimes things just happen and a mediocre shot is more
powerful than none at all.

------
balls187
Kind of cool.

9.8, from France.
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/xbQHksWyRsOPWhW3hhs6RA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/xbQHksWyRsOPWhW3hhs6RA)

Not really a coach though. More of a critic.

------
roywiggins
Based on other people's attempts to please it, I thought it would like this
close-up of a snail I took. 9.4/10 and a ribbon so I guess we know what it
likes! [https://keegan.regaind.io/p/rUMLzUc5SO-
aZUoZzz31Tg](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/rUMLzUc5SO-aZUoZzz31Tg)

On the other hand, it doesn't like the lighting or colors on this, and wants
more bokeh. I'm willing to grant that the composition is dull, but the colors?
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/pQ9U6CiMRKWNkYVgqLZTCQ](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/pQ9U6CiMRKWNkYVgqLZTCQ)

And again it complains about lighting, which is probably the last thing I
would worry about on this one:
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/-CC6phAPScux1CSYPqY24Q](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/-CC6phAPScux1CSYPqY24Q)

And this one has the same light, and cleaner composition, but it still
complains- I'm not sure what it thinks would improve it. "Bad composition" is
not helpful advice here.
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/6T6V3k8fRLSWMn2JT6-N4g](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/6T6V3k8fRLSWMn2JT6-N4g)

Meanwhile, it's weirdly positive about this digital monstrosity:
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/Csyd3O6pRg6vra2hqumKOQ](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/Csyd3O6pRg6vra2hqumKOQ)

------
riebschlager
It's really in to bad stock photos:

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/BpYbZznQQQObZa9BDHH7AQ](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/BpYbZznQQQObZa9BDHH7AQ)

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/rIr8UAIxTuSxGeZg5FumbA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/rIr8UAIxTuSxGeZg5FumbA)

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/8duBvzXmRfGAg7DpdJQSiA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/8duBvzXmRfGAg7DpdJQSiA)

~~~
iXce
Everyone has some bad tastes at times, no ? :) But yeah, it's not perfect yet!

------
swalsh
One of the issues is sometimes, it's okay to do things in a non-standard way
for effect. The other issue is it seems to think the only thing that matters
in photography is depth of field.

For example, this kind of generic picture of my son during the fall got an
8.2: [http://imgur.com/a/SOFE0](http://imgur.com/a/SOFE0)

Where as this other picture I took, one I think is technically superior
recently got a 7.1: [http://imgur.com/a/VeEL9](http://imgur.com/a/VeEL9)

And then there was this one I took in Rome, which got a comment of "not enough
blur" which is the exact opposite of what I wanted. This is a fiat in rome,
the background is the entire point. rated at 6.2
[http://imgur.com/a/zLStt](http://imgur.com/a/zLStt)

Compared to this pretty generic musuem pic... that's not really interesting in
any way, but managed to get an 8.2 (probably because of the blur)
[http://imgur.com/a/Szc9I](http://imgur.com/a/Szc9I)

------
tristor
I don't understand their algorithm. Take three of my photos off my Flickr
page:

1) I consider this photo mediocre. Gets a 10/10, Platinum Ribbon.
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/lJ7FEb1kQt-mM1kIe-
kVuw](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/lJ7FEb1kQt-mM1kIe-kVuw)

2) I consider this photo to be fantastic. Perfect reflection. Gets a 7.7/10,
no ribbons.
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/KUzvRfFeRsK1Lj1selLWQw](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/KUzvRfFeRsK1Lj1selLWQw)

3) I consider this photo good but not great. Okay but not perfect reflection.
Gets an 8.7/10, Reflection Ribbon.
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/zaRlMOEySFWKTZlSvWO3Rw](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/zaRlMOEySFWKTZlSvWO3Rw)

This is confusing as hell to me. I'm averaging 7.98/10 over 30 photos, which
personally I think is too high. I'm not that good. But at the same time, my
best photos are rated very low and my mediocre photos are rated very highly.
This makes no sense.

This photo gets a 6.2/10 and is rated negatively for composition, but is
actually near perfect (if I'd have a wider angle lens it might have been
better). It follows the rule of 3s with reinforcing repetition throughout,
including even in the perfectly captured reflections of me taking the photo
itself. It's not an /interesting/ photo, but it's practically perfect
composition.
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/hrbE85wGQWW3vs5w1QoGFg](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/hrbE85wGQWW3vs5w1QoGFg)

Keegan is weird.

~~~
iXce
The scores range is explained in the modal, 5 is for decent pictures, 7-8 for
great ones, 9 for exceptional ones. Your average is really good, and all the
scores you got are pretty good as well, congratulations! Keegan definitely
makes much worse mistakes than these ^^ Ribbons are one time events that have
very different thresholds for happening, if you already got a given ribbon on
one picture you won't get it again even if your new picture would be an even
better fit for it!

Overall aesthetics is a very subjective subject, and getting perfectly
accurate scores for it on the wide variety of photos out there is still an
open challenge :)

------
tkazec
Love how fast this is! Wish it could actually offer advice. Seems heavily
biased towards portraits with shallow depths of fields.

~~~
iXce
Well depending on the picture it may give you very direct tips on what
criteria to improve, especially on low score photos (<5).

~~~
tkazec
Fair enough! Few specific issues:

\- Can't add pictures to the hall of fame after the fact.

\- Can't remove pictures from the hall of fame.

\- Re-uploading a ribbon picture doesn't work.

~~~
iXce
Well these are mostly intended, but are kind of leftover of the phase where we
had no user authentication implemented. You can still delete pictures from
your profile
([https://keegan.regaind.io/profile](https://keegan.regaind.io/profile)), that
will remove them from Hall of Fame as well. Your ribbon shows there by the
way! (ribbons are implemented as one time events which depend on your user
status, and are not stored alongside the picture. maybe we could fix that)

Thanks for the report tho, I'll see what we can do for reenabling the hall of
fame button after the first show!

------
Numberwang
[http://imgur.com/a/ZwM1N](http://imgur.com/a/ZwM1N)

"Your colors are flat. OK image. You could improve your colors. This deserves
a 5.5/10\. Not bad, but I'm sure you can do better!"

~~~
tristor
That's... strange. My guess is that it's saying this because of the
overwhelming amount of green in the background. But taken as a whole this
photo is almost a study in color. Clearly the algorithm discounts the artistic
value of contrast lighting from the lamp and the differing colors of the rug
and bookshelf contrasting with the greenery.

~~~
Numberwang
I think you are probably right. It's all CGI btw.

------
kailuowang
Uploading this photo hangs the system...
[https://www.flickr.com/photos/nnbb_alf/3181106186/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/nnbb_alf/3181106186/)

~~~
iXce
weird, it worked for me:
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/jPERL_ltSqG8WwwCtVlwaA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/jPERL_ltSqG8WwwCtVlwaA)

------
magic5227
Ansel Adams 7.5/10
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/uoVo3TIjR1C3P-Q49drUlA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/uoVo3TIjR1C3P-Q49drUlA)

------
kailuowang
Posted a masterpiece by Stephen Shore, Keegan didn't care for it.

 _Static composition, my eyes don 't really know where to look and the pic is
not very exciting… It's flawed, but you'll get there: keep working on your
composition and lighting. This is at most 3.8/10\. #messy#boring_

Here is the photo [http://www.fubiz.net/wp-
content/uploads/2015/07/stephenshore...](http://www.fubiz.net/wp-
content/uploads/2015/07/stephenshore-1-900x692.jpg)

~~~
komali2
I mean, is that a masterpiece? I ask as someone who is unaware of Stephen
Shore and has never seen this picture before. As someone living in 2016, that
looks like a random picture of a gas station someone took on a road trip. I
agree with Keegan here, it's boring.

I'm sure there's some historical context or something I'm missing out on here,
but that's just my take looking at the picture.

~~~
biotech
I am also unaware of Stephen Shore, and have not seen this picture before. I
guess we can chalk it up to different tastes - I think this picture is
amazing. It captures the feeling of the place.

~~~
oh_sigh
How do you know what the feeling of the place is? Have you ever been to that
gas station?

~~~
jrockway
It doesn't matter, the point is that a feeling is captured.

Many people seem to think that photography is solely documentary, but that is
only one possible aspect. You also have control over what is in and out of the
picture, where objects are relative to each other, the relative tones and
brightness of objects, etc., and can use that to tell a story that's not
strictly true. If you've ever been composing a shot, noticed that there is a
big pile of garbage in the frame, and shifted the angle slightly, you're
already doing this.

~~~
oh_sigh
Well...a feeling is captured, not the feeling.

~~~
jrockway
Like all forms of art, the idea is to show the artist's feeling, not to tell
you what you would personally feel.

------
voidingw
It recognizes food! [https://keegan.regaind.io/p/An6jvK-
mQxOS-z8bIg8bwQ](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/An6jvK-mQxOS-z8bIg8bwQ)

------
rangibaby
Yay I got a ribbon

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/GBjTf_wVRPGsY8A7fmNw6w](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/GBjTf_wVRPGsY8A7fmNw6w)

------
k2xl
As amazing as the advancements to image recognition technology have been, I'm
equally astonished of the progress corresponding language generation.

I would be interested to see a Turing test with this tool versus a real
photographer analysis.

Restrict the "analysis" to 3 or 4 sentences along with a score. The
participant goal would be to figure out which analysis came from the AI and
which came from the photographer. Would be interesting to see the results...

~~~
iXce
Thanks ^_^ as mentioned in the about modal we received a lot of quality help
to polish Keegan's language :)

~~~
bambax
Are you based in Paris? That's great!

~~~
iXce
We do! We're at Agoranov near Luco, feel free to drop by if you want to have a
chat :)

~~~
bambax
I'd love to! Are you Guillaume?

Are you working on more than classification? What about automatic
improvements, including not just lightning but also straightening, cropping,
etc.

~~~
iXce
I'm! You can get in touch with us at hello /at/ regaind.io

You can have a look at your webpage for all that we do
([https://regaind.io](https://regaind.io)), but yeah, automatic improvement is
on the list of potential things we would like to do :)

------
samstave
> __ _" You nailed the subject placement but that lighting is NOT working.
> Your portrait could be so much better. Try improving your lighting,
> background, and blur! No more than a 4.5/10, maybe less. Not so good, but
> I'm sure you can do better! Try again :)"_ __

Don 't know how to do those setting changes on my phone :-) I just posted a
selfie on Bart... Bart lighting isn't too flattering

------
omginternets
Tasteless and sophomoric though it may be, I decided to feed pornography to
Keegan [0].

He seems to like it. 6.5/10 for a generic, raunchy shot.

The point is that pornography is probably the least-composed imaging one can
find. It feels like this bot is just spitting out random compliments.

[0] [https://imgur.com/a/s5vdh](https://imgur.com/a/s5vdh) [NSFW, obvioulsy]

~~~
iXce
Well, the composition is not bad, the colors are more than decent. There's no
bad motion blur, the main subject is clear (albeit gross). The score seems
decent for that.

Actually, the score scaling is a very tough subject for a public thing. We
received some comments saying that Keegan is wayy too harsh, it seems people
expect their everyday picture to score 7-8 (we've been told it'd be a big
problem in the US especially, I can't judge on that as not living there tho
:/), while we feel that Keegan s generally a bit too generous for Europe
standards.

~~~
omginternets
Hi,

I might be a particularly tough sell since I grew up in the US but have been
living in Europe for quite some time now ;)

I think what you're seeing on is AI hype in action. The marketing of Keegan
suggests that it's AI should be capturing some of what is usually perceived as
subjective taste (e.g. whether or not the image is "interesting"). This ends
up disappointing because the AI (which is clearly an incredible technical
feat) is really just capturing objective elements of composition.

Perhaps you just need to fine-tune the language so as to do some expectation
management?

------
technologia
On a side note, is it just me or does the character at the top of the page
look ominous/creepy?

~~~
iXce
that's because Keegan can be witty and a bit harsh at times :) but yeah now
that you say it I can imagine some creepy memes with him xD

~~~
jrockway
Is he good friends with the Incognito guy?

------
makmanalp
Tip: you can click the "Get more feedback!" button for a detailed breakdown of
scores.

------
taserian
My daughter's cat picture got a 6.6. I know it could use some brightness, but
I still love it.

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/-HlqBiO2Qhy2xcWVeetqaA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/-HlqBiO2Qhy2xcWVeetqaA)

------
careersuicide
It likes my dog so much I got an achievement for it:
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/g4bTVKBlRlK03OADh4SXog](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/g4bTVKBlRlK03OADh4SXog)

~~~
iXce
Well done :p There are 17 hidden achievements with multiple thematic ones like
this!

------
virtualritz
AI fail.
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/ij0_ZDpFR92ryOwW5O_xGA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/ij0_ZDpFR92ryOwW5O_xGA)

------
dmd
Shoe fetish?
[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/oAGqMK24Sk6o6jRJZ6CT-A](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/oAGqMK24Sk6o6jRJZ6CT-A)

------
compactmani
I tried it with my favorite, Alex Webb. It didn't break 5/10 and received
solid #mess and #boring tags on all of the photos. Fun none the less.

------
zwieback
Can't wait for the next AI winter...

------
tempodox
My test photo got classified as “not a photo”. Keegan may be artificial, but
certainly not “intelligent”.

~~~
iXce
Judge on a single sample, do you ? :) That's a fairly strong statement based
on a fairly small dataset :( But yeah, our heuristics to ignore some content
(e.g. websites screenshots) sometimes trip on real pictures. There's still a
lot of room for improvement :)

~~~
bambax
Judging by the tags, it recognizes this as a street sign (which is great and
amazing), and yet says it's "not a photo".

A photo of a street sign is definitely a photo ;-)

[https://keegan.regaind.io/p/v5bCFkeRRYSvendxCM73yA](https://keegan.regaind.io/p/v5bCFkeRRYSvendxCM73yA)

~~~
iXce
Yeah it's super harsh with street signs or that kind of large text on
pictures. The protection is there to avoid saying really silly stuff on
utilities bills and other kinds of paperwork. I'll add this example to the
ones we should accept.

------
neom
I think the subject was hiding in my portrait due to me uploaded a landscape.

~~~
iXce
Haha do you have the link for that fail?

------
ape4
I was nothing is wrong but could be more. More what?

~~~
iXce
Hey there! Do you have Keegan's URL for the picture on which you got that
comment ?

~~~
ape4
Sorry, no.

------
keeganjw
Well. This is trippy.

