This phrase could cast a broadening net with each year’s new tech.
Our brains do far worse stuff with our memories. Not sure how relevant 'high fidelity' is to people who mostly use phones for memories
Compare this to AI/ML-manipulated photos that aren't labelled as such. In this case we no longer know if it's our brain fudging a picture or our camera, so we are starting to lose an arbiter of truth.
Side-rant but it'll be weird when this makes it into high-end cameras that save RAW images. Will RAW still be "raw?" I don't know enough to say.
"The Hottest Gen Z Gadget Is a 20-Year-Old Digital Camera
Young people are opting for point-and-shoots and blurry photos."
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/07/technology/digital-camera...
I think it's great. It's the exact opposite of the person who spends all their time gear shopping and never using the gear.
The remaining budget can go into going to nice places to shoot nice photos, and to print them nicely and large enough to put on your wall choice.
I picked Nikon, but I assume Canon works as well.
The G9x Mark II, Sony RX100, Panasonic LUMIX and similar 1" sensor cameras are awesome though and I don't think they've gotten too crazy with computational photography. I imagine some color processing modes might be doing a bit of work though.
All the subtle trickery manipulation that the smart phone's doing to reality is concerning. Smoothing people's faces, making their eyes pop, enhancing the shit out of the colours, and now plopping fake objects overtop of the real ones.
Future concerns of this technology should range from a low-key disconnect from reality, to the complete inability to photograph certain objects or locations.
Imagine dusting off a 30 year old digital camera, finding some AA batteries to put in it, snap a selfie and then realizing just how ugly we all are and how washed out the polluted world actually looks without a bunch of narcissism-pandering enhancements.