[dead]
What a toxic comment. He is simply referring to the technical difficulty associated with darker skin tones. Of course we should strive for making it applicable for everyone. Sometimes physiological variations get into play; sometimes this means a method isn't adequate, or you can use different methods for different persons.
Re:Eulerian Video Magnification
by danielheath on Thursday September 03, 2020 @09:53PM
(#24370992)
Darkness is the property of absorbing light.
The technique of analysing light which penetrates the skin, then reflects, then penetrates the skin again on the way out? Easier with skin that allows more light through.
You can turn up the light source to make up for the loss due to skin pigmentation, though this can require a very bright lamp for particularly dark skin.
Re:Eulerian Video Magnification
by jimmydorry on Thursday September 03, 2020 @09:40PM
(#24370936)
From the commenting guideline:
>Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
>Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
Please refrain from commenting like that on other threads.
Re:Eulerian Video Magnification
by carrolldunham on Thursday September 03, 2020 @07:25PM
(#24369992)
The poster said it needs good i.e. bright lighting to work. How is it contentious that it would be harder with skin that reflects less light?
I worked on it a bit at some point, it does work pretty well assuming you don't move that much and the light isn't too bad. As you can imagine, it's more difficult to estimate on non-white faces, particularly very dark skin tones. All the algorithms (at least until 2016) differ in the way of combining the RGB signals into a pulse signal by making different assumptions.
If you are interested more, Philips in the Netherlands are particularly active in this research domain, one of the main application being non-contact pulse estimation in hospitals for example.