Why are screenshots for personal use only frowned upon, yet having a photographic memory and using it for the same purpose isn't?

[thecel]

Why do girls hate it when guys screenshot their social media posts? If the screenshots are for personal viewing only, how is it different from people with photographic memories looking at the girls in their minds?

Screenshotting posts for memory purposes is pretty much outsourcing storage to a much more reliable medium. Memories become less accurate over time and eventually get forgotten, but digital files last a long time.

Saving pics and screenshotting is crucial for people suffering from aphantasia, the lack of a "mind's eye" or the inability to visualize. Imagine seeing a super gorgeous woman and never being able to see how she looks ever again, since you don't have any photos of her and you can't imagine visual images. Ain't that so sad? Girls ought to have empathy for these guys who have from aphantasia or have very poor visualization abilities.

Do girls really not want guys to remember what they look like in HD?

And if you have a photographic memory, I'm pretty sure (correct me if I'm wrong) that real photos of women are still much better to look at. When I imagine my crush with shitty visualization ability of my pea brain, it doesn't produce anything close to the magnitude of "OMG SHE'S SO PERFECT" I feel when I look at photos of her, and to an even greater extent, her in real life.

 

[Deleted member 2403]

Weird flex innit

 

[thecel]

Weird flex innit

Not a flex. I don't have a photographic memory. (I don't think it's a weird flex for other people either, photographic memories are fucking epic) My brain is very bad at visualization, which is why screenshots are so important to me. I can't see the women I fancy in high quality without pics.

 

[Deleted member 10413]

shitty visualization ability

You'll get better at visualization if you practice. Also photographic memory is impossible. Just think about what would happen if you had a photographic memory and looked into a rainstorm.

How to see clear images in your minds eye

How To Learn Visualization Before you get started… Please keep in mind – you’ll need patience. Likely, you won’t get results right away. But, if you stick to daily practice sessions, dedicate a few minutes each day, you’ll be greatly rewarded with new and beautiful skill. Exercise #1 –...

looksmax.org

 

[thecel]

Just think about what would happen if you had a photographic memory and looked into a rainstorm.

What would happen?

 

[Deleted member 10413]

What would happen?

Well you would memorize the thousands and thousands and thousands of constantly falling raindrops and there positions shortly after they fall. Even a god tier savant like Stephen Wiltshire has limits. This was a picture of him drawing a city after he rode around in a helicopter trying to memorize it.

Drawing City Skylines from Memory – Stephen Wiltshire

This is beyond AMAZING!!!! This has to be top 10 of one of the most amazing talents that I have ever seen. Stephen has the amazing talent of drawing city skylines from memory. Having spent only a f…

thelosangelesbeat.com

 

[Chadeep]

Screenshot your convos. So that you don't get into trouble in future.

 

[thecel]

Well you would memorize the thousands and thousands and thousands of constantly falling raindrops and there positions shortly after they fall. Even a god tier savant like Stephen Wiltshire has limits. This was a picture of him drawing a city after he rode around in a helicopter trying to memorize it.

Drawing City Skylines from Memory – Stephen Wiltshire

This is beyond AMAZING!!!! This has to be top 10 of one of the most amazing talents that I have ever seen. Stephen has the amazing talent of drawing city skylines from memory. Having spent only a f…

thelosangelesbeat.com

Regarding the raindrops example—that's not how a photographic memory works. That's how an un-photographic memory works.

With a photographic memory, you remember the raw light data, not objects that you reconstruct upon visualization.

I don't have a photographic memory. If I wanted to remember an image of this webpage, I'd have to read and remember the text and the positions, sizes, and contents of all the UI elements like buttons, bars, and icons. When I visualize the page, I'd have to build it with the information I remembered. For example, I'd have to know that the order of the buttons in the top bar is "Forums", "Members", "Rules", "Chat", and "PornDude". A person with a photographic memory doesn't need to do all that; they can basically take photos/screenshots of the screen with their brain.

A person with a truly photographic memory can remember images as the light signals that hit their retina. They don't have to examine the scene and remember individual items. They just remember what they see.

If you asked me to look at a fence, close my eyes, and tell you how many fenceposts there were, I couldn't. I'd have to count them looking at the fence. On the contrary, because a photographic memory stores visual data, a person who has one could close their eyes and count the fenceposts in their mind.

 

[Deleted member 10413]

That's not how a photographic memory works. That's how an un-photographic memory works.

With a photographic memory, you remember the raw light data, not objects that you reconstruct upon visualization.

I don't have a photographic memory. If I wanted to remember an image of this webpage, I'd have to read and remember the text and the positions, sizes, and contents of all the UI elements like buttons, bars, and icons. When I visualize the page, I'd have to build it with the information I remembered. For example, I'd have to know that the order of the buttons in the top bar are "Forums", "Members", "Rules", "Chat", and "PornDude".

A person with a truly photographic memory can remember what they saw as the light signals that hit their retina. They don't have to examine the scene and remember individual items. They just remember what they see.

This distinction is irrelevant though because its still not even close to being possible. The ability to remember everything you see and recall it perfectly is fantasy at best. The closest you can get is hyperthymesia.

 

[thecel]

This distinction is irrelevant though because its still not even close to being possible. The ability to remember everything you see and recall it perfectly is fantasy at best. The closest you can get is hyperthymesia.

Having a photographic memory doesn't mean your memories are in 8K 240FPS wide-gamut 64-bit HDR. Photographic memories can be quickly forgotten and need not be of high quality.

Only the central 2 degrees of your visual field, the fovea of the retina, is sharp. The rest of your vision is very blurry. A photographic memory image is not like a photo taken by a camera in which it's sharp and high-detail everywhere.

 

[Deleted member 10413]

Having a photographic memory doesn't mean your memories are in 8K 240FPS wide-gamut 64-bit HDR. Photographic memories can be quickly forgotten and need not be of high quality.

Only the central 2 degrees of your visual field, the fovea of the retina, is sharp. The rest of your vision is very blurry. A photographic memory image is not like a photo taken by a camera in which it's sharp and high-detail everywhere.

We can get into weird arguments about what it means to "see" something or what "exactly" means but at the end of the day no human has ever demonstrated an ability near this level so I'm going to always see it as impossible.

 

[thecel]

View attachment 1021252
We can get into weird arguments about what it means to "see" something or what "exactly" means but at the end of the day no human has ever demonstrated an ability near this level so I'm going to always see it as impossible.

"Exactly as they were seen," meaning only the central 2º of your FOV is clear, and the rest is blurry (if it's a single glance). You can look around and collect image data to make the sharp region of the remembered image bigger. But it's not like you can just look for 1 second and get a panoramic gigapixel photo. A raw image pulled straight from your eyes would be accurate (except for blind spots) yet low quality except at the center.

 

[Tony]

besed n thecelpilled

 

[Tony]

besed n thecelpilled

 

[datboijj]

View attachment 1021252
We can get into weird arguments about what it means to "see" something or what "exactly" means but at the end of the day no human has ever demonstrated an ability near this level so I'm going to always see it as impossible.