These are part of a larger package of super-resolution models and processing pipeline that Samsung licenses from ArcSoft, a computational photography software company that specialises in mobile devices.
Interesting, though there seems to be no reference to this kind of function in Arcsoft site:
https://www.arcsoft.com/product/single-camera-solutions-on-s...
https://www.arcsoft.com/product/dual-camera-solutions-on-sma...
What they mention seems more "logical" enhancements, though the selfie feature of gender and age detection :
https://www.arcsoft.com/product/single-camera-solutions-on-s...
is somehow creepy.
Anyway, if they can recognize gender and age and what do you have in your refrigerator ("This offers users a smoother and smarter refrigerator experience.") :
https://www.arcsoft.com/product/smart-refrigerator-solutions...
surely they can recognize the moon.
Now that they made me think about it, my refrigerator experience, while usually smooth enough, is pretty dumb and repetitive.
Some strings from that file, relating to the moon detection and enhancement process:
AHDR_SetMoonMask
ai_moon
ArcSoft_Moon_Detection_2.1.125231001.2
ArcSoft_MoonEnhancement_1.1.12021.257
ARC_SRR_DisableDaytimeMoonScene
ARC_SRR_GetMoonSceneType
ARC_SRR_SetMoonWeight
bMoonMode
bMoonProtect
MFSR Moon Detect
moon count is %d
MoonDetect
MoonDetect_Init
%s_%02d_AIE_Output_ISO_%d_DRC_%0.2f_HDRMoon_%d_%dx%d
%s_%02d_CropMoonMask_Idx_%d_%dx%d
%s_%02d_DaynightAIMoon_Output_Idx_%d_%dx%d
%s_%02d_DaytimeAIMoon_Output_Idx_%d_%dx%d
%s_%02d_MoonDetection_Input_%dx%d
%s_%02d_MoonHDR_Output_ISO_%d_DRC_%0.2f_HDR_%d_Moon_%d_%dx%d
%s_%02d_MoonMask_Idx_%d_%dx%d
%s_%02d_ResizedMoonMask_Idx_%d_%dx%d
/sdcard/download/arcsr/%s_moon_mask_%dx%d.gray
%s/FusionRun_pMoonmask_%dx%d.gray
void mfsr_moon_detect(gk_mfsr *)https://www.inverse.com/input/reviews/is-samsung-galaxy-s21-...
moon count is %d
I am extremely tickled that they planned ahead for multiple moons.I roughly think about it being like you have a lot of high res moons lossy compressed into model weights until they are basically distilled into some abstract sense of “moon image”-ness “indexed” by blurry image patches. Running the network then “unzips” some of that detail over matching low resolution patches.
(Using quotes to denote terms I am heavily abusing in this loose analogy)
Edit: Importantly though I think this isn’t that different from what you are describing in terms of whether this is potentially misleading customers about the optics on their device, because it is inserting detail not actually captured by the camera sensor.
If the model and its weights contain detail not in the photo being taken, then it's tantamount to having high res images of the moon stored on camera and composited into the image. And if it doesn't then it's not the moon being displayed.
Not that it's necessarily bad, but it could be if it fools someone into thinking they're buying superior electro/optics. Enough such that it warranted the line "Samsung continues to improve Scene Optimizer to reduce any potential confusion that may occur between the act of taking a picture of the real moon and an image of the moon".
This is what is happening. I agree it’s tricking people into thinking it’s all optics and that’s kinda bad.
What I'm wondering is what else is being swapped out.
IT experts are brought into cases all the time for stuff like this. This isn't even the standard camera "lying", it's explicitly a special tab for taking super-zoomed in AI optimized photos.
Once you have that general framework, though, I'd expect the Samsung to want to 'enhance' Samsung phones and smartwatches (especially), Coke cans, candles, and cars, butterflies and birds, the Moon or a Macbook, rainbows or diamond rings, and anything else that's both hard to take a good picture of and also a common photography subject. Speaking of Coke cans, that gives my pessimistic, dystopian-leaning imagination an idea: I wonder if Coke could or other brands might in future develop an exclusive partnership with Samsung to send stock photos of their product, resulting in photos of your meal where the familiar red can looks especially glossy, saturated, reflective, crisp, and refreshing...while an Instagram of your meal from the food truck that has cans of Pepsi still looks like a cell phone photo.
Upscaling photos of printed pages by matching against a font library seems like a similar opportunity, though you run into the old Xerox copier issue that the transformation removes information about uncertainty. I'm sure they'd love to have pictures of people look better too, but it's more difficult when there are billions of subjects to ID.
I'm not saying that they should or should not do any of this, but when you want to sell phones with cameras that make your shots look really good, this kind of technique lets you cheat the laws of physics.
I properly don't get all the outrage, ironing faces, changing colors and removing moles is a nice celebrated feature and even created whole 'Apple skin' thingie, but adding well known static details to blurry image of the moon is somehow suddenly crossing the line? That line has been crossed long time ago my friends, look at optic physics of those tiny sensors and crappy lenses and results 'ya all want from them. People mentioned yesterday in main thread that Apple latest switched side pic of bunny in the grass for his other side, which is even more hilarious 'painting rather than photography' case.
Plus how things are exactly done in phone is known to maybe 10 engineers most probably in Korea, but people here quickly jumped on outrage wagon from 1 very lightly and non-scientifically done test on reddit (I tried to repeat his experiment with S22 ultra but failed 100% of the time, with his own images, it was just blurry mess 100% of the cases).
I have S22 ultra and its making properly good completely handheld night photos in total darkness (just stars, but no moon and no artificial light). I mean me standing in dark forest 11pm, snapping nice detailed foliage and starry pics, where my very eyes see very little from the scene. It very well surpasses my fullframe Nikon with superb lense in this. But its true that is done by main, big sensor, and not 10x zoom one, which is then zoomed extra say 3-4x digitally to get shot of moon which spans whole picture.