This may be obvious to the previous two commenters but I want to specifically add that a lot of camera tech is not great capturing darker skinned people. This has been an issue perhaps as long as the camera has been around. Clearly google did some work to address that and want to show it on the page.

I'm going to assume that because the copy just says "skin tones" and doesn't specifically call out darker skin the gp (or whatever the first commenter is) is confused by what they're seeing and reading.

Are they talking about how they've improved skin tone representation for all people, in which case I would expect more variation of skin tone in those photos, or are they saying that they improved representation of skin tones which contain more melanin? They literally said "all people," but I assume they actually mean the latter based on the representative photos.

They already took fantastic pictures of light skinned folks.

I disagree. I hate taking photos with my phone when I have the opportunity to use a my full-frame Sony camera. It's also very easy to mess up skin tones in tricky lighting situations, whether we're talking about light or dark-skinned people. Having multiple temperatures of light in the frame is probably the biggest issue (e.g., window light plus light from an incandescent bulb). It can really unbalance the rendering of skin tone.

I did a bit of searching just now and found that Google is calling this update "Real Tone." https://store.google.com/intl/en/discover/realtone/

From what I can tell, they have likely improved things for people of all skin colors, but probably moreso for those with darker skin due to increased focus on ML training. They include a person with fairly light skin on that page in comparison to the product page.

Do I really have to specify "for a phone"? Obviously you can get better pictures with a $2000 full frame camera...