Eye Contact Correction: Redirecting the eyes to look at the camera

Practically --

I feel hardware technology can improve further to allow under-the-LED-display cameras .... so that we can actually look at both the camera and the screen at the same time.

(There are fingerprint sensors under mobile screens now ...and I think even some front facing cameras are being built in without sacrificing a punch hole / pixels. There is scope to make this better and seamless so we can have multiple cameras if we want behind a typical laptop screen or desktop monitor.)

This would make for a genuine look-at-the-camera video whether we are looking at other attendees in a meeting or reading off our slide notes (teleprompter style).

There would be no need to fake it.

More philosophically --

I don't quite like the normalization of AI tampering with actual videos and photos casually -- on mobile phone cameras or elsewhere. Cameras are supposed to capture reality by default. I know there is already heavy noise reduction, color correction, auto exposure etc ... but no need to use that to justify more tampering with individual facial features and expressions.

Videos are and will be used for recording humans as they are. The capturing of their genuine features and expressions should be valued more. Video should help people bond as people with as genuine body lanuage as possible. Videos will be used as memories of people bygone. Videos will be used as forensic or crime scene evidence.

Let us protect the current state of video capture. All AI enhancements should be marketed separately under a different name, not silently added into existing cameras.

I get the general philosophical point but to take a fun counterargument - cameras don't record the moment. They record a very narrow snapshot in time. One you, or anyone around you, may not recognise.

Have you ever looked at a group of friends and thought "ONE OF YOU IS BLINKING"? No. Yet it's quite common to have a photo where at least one person is mid-blink. The 30-year lifespan of that photo includes the milliseconds they were blinking. Is it untrue to have a picture where two people were not blinking and standing side by side? They did in real life, in those same poses, but fractions of a second apart. Is it a failure to capture reality by having a picture of them with their eyes open? Maybe - or maybe the blending of several moments is more true to the original situation than any specific snapshot could be.

> I feel hardware technology can improve further to allow under-the-LED-display cameras .... so that we can actually look at both the camera and the screen at the same time.

That doesn't fully solve the problem because you'd be looking at the middle of the screen not at the person talking to you in a group.

> Video should help people bond as people with as genuine body lanuage as possible.

I agree, but having people be able to actually look at each other is surely part of this.

> cameras don't record the moment. They record a very narrow snapshot in time.

Isn't a "moment" a very narrow snapshot in time by definition?