With the ultrawide lenses, you can point the phone quite far away from someone while they are still in the frame. And you can, of course, record audio while the other person can't even see the phone, and that's much more likely to be incriminating.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Vision Pro :: No (Arguably Obvious) Outward Recording Indicator
- Thread starter kylelerner
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For every thing that's "rage bait for concern trolls", it's a suggestion and an inspiration for stupid people.
Your desires are not "needs"
More annoying, though, is the fact the Apple Vision Pro DOES have an indicator and yet here you are complaining that it does not.
About the shutter sound in Japan, It doesn't stop people from recording or taking live pictures (which has a noticeable smaller sound than the camera shutter). Also there's a bunch of apps with "silent" shutter modes, do I don't think it has helped in a while.
It's a dick thing to do, and if you violate their wishes, you're a dick. Get off your high horse and show those around you some common courtesy and empathy.
Simple.
Everyone has to assume they are always recording.
And I would be weary of a person walking around with a thing on their face as much if not more than someone holding a phone up recording.
People being weirded out by people recording them should be a thing of the past. You should assume you are being recorded if in public. If in private - ask the person not to.
I dont get the concern.
And people can record with a phone without being obvious. I voice record conversations regularly with my watch especially when salesmen promise something. It’s legal in my state and it saves your butt a lot. People lie.
There's nothing signaling to bystanders that they're being recorded in those videos because either they're being filmed by another camera than the vision pro OR we're seeing it from the viewpoint of the one wearing it. So in either case, we don't see the pulsating white light on the front. When you see a vision pro literally flashing white light at you, you know something is up. If it's not flashing light at you, you're not being recorded. Easy.
in public if you see someone with one you should just assume they are recording and here at least it's legal to record in public. there are however creeps out there that will use it in the wrong way. there should definitely be an indicator on it to let people know it's recording. flashing white isn't good enough. it should be a red dot which could be lit up/flashing. they could even change the position of it so you can see what direction the person is looking in.
Do we though?
I'm here on MacRumours reading about Macs, iPhones and iPads and Watches and now the AVP daily.
I'd say I am far more knowledgable about tech and Apple stuff than most of my friends, family and peers.
That the AVP does some strange white flashing thing would not indicate to me it is recording or snapping pics.
I'd see that and assume that's just what the AVP does, like the weird eyes thing. Or it may be rebooting… or sending distress signals. Sure it signals something, but recording isn't one of them.
Whereas a red dot/circle/button is universally accepted as an indication of recording happening.
Why Apple Inc in their infinite wisdom decided to disregard that is a curious choice.
agree with you. i didn't even know until i came into this thread that the headset flashes white if it's recording. red circle is pretty much universally recognised as recording. i'm sure apple will change it at some point but seems strange they didn't include it from the start.
Universally? I've never seen such an indicator on the front of a recording device. It's normally used to indicate to the person making the recording that the recording is taking place.
*sigh*
OK. Let me try again…
It is universally accepted as a symbol for recording.
Whether that is on top in front or behind…
Now, yeah, feel free to keep arguing and split hairs, knowing exactly what I meant.
👍
I understood what you meant. I just don't think that it's the obvious answer for the front of the device considering it's not used on the front of any other device.
And like I said earlier, a red light on the front of the device would alter the color of the scene you are recording.
I feel the privacy-in-public ship sailed long ago.
We’re all already on thousands of other people’s photos and videos in the cloud. We all mostly appear in the background of something else they were recording - but we’re there nonetheless. We just don’t know it.
Looking through my own photographs, I have tons of strangers in the backgrounds. On beaches, in museums, restaurants, train stations, airports, parks, etc. It’s unavoidable.
Now, my old photos have blurry background faces thanks to the old tech from back then, but the newer ones have such good resolution you can zoom right in and say ”well hello there!”.
We’re all already on thousands of other people’s photos and videos in the cloud. We all mostly appear in the background of something else they were recording - but we’re there nonetheless. We just don’t know it.
Looking through my own photographs, I have tons of strangers in the backgrounds. On beaches, in museums, restaurants, train stations, airports, parks, etc. It’s unavoidable.
Now, my old photos have blurry background faces thanks to the old tech from back then, but the newer ones have such good resolution you can zoom right in and say ”well hello there!”.
Seems like a non-issue in the modern context? Cameras are everywhere. If you're in a public space you can generally assume you're being recorded or could be at any time. And to me, seeing someone with AVP or VR goggles on in a public space the logical assumption is that my image and that of the other surroundings is being processed or captured in some manner, recording or not.
I don't know about others, but in a private space I tend to be with people I trust, so again it's basically a non-issue. I suppose if you saw someone wearing white flashy screened AVP in a locker room or something that'd be a different scenario. A private space, strangers. But also, white flashy screened AVP on some creeper's face in a locker room seems to be a big red flag that your image is being processed or captured, recording or not. These things aren't exactly subtle.
I don't know about others, but in a private space I tend to be with people I trust, so again it's basically a non-issue. I suppose if you saw someone wearing white flashy screened AVP in a locker room or something that'd be a different scenario. A private space, strangers. But also, white flashy screened AVP on some creeper's face in a locker room seems to be a big red flag that your image is being processed or captured, recording or not. These things aren't exactly subtle.
The arguments against this being an issue:
1. Phones typically don't do this, and they're used to take photos/videos far more often.
2. It's probably wise to teach people to assume they are always being recorded in the presence of any kind of headset/camera glasses, at least until you confirm that you aren't.
3. There is actually an indicator, and it appears the color matches what's becoming industry-standard.
4. If you want people to do something worth recording with your headset on, you're best advised to let them know you're about to record a spatial video beforehand.
1. Phones typically don't do this, and they're used to take photos/videos far more often.
2. It's probably wise to teach people to assume they are always being recorded in the presence of any kind of headset/camera glasses, at least until you confirm that you aren't.
3. There is actually an indicator, and it appears the color matches what's becoming industry-standard.
4. If you want people to do something worth recording with your headset on, you're best advised to let them know you're about to record a spatial video beforehand.
If that were the actual situation, sure. There is an indicator, and white is becoming the industry standard color to indicate headsets/glasses are recording. I can see why they'd pick white, since colorblindness is a possible issue if they went with green or red. "That family member" has already had access to much sneakier ways to record you without your knowledge for decades.
The only controversy is because some people don't know about the indicator yet, not because it doesn't have one.
100% agree.
As an extreme techie, it was not obvious to me that "pulsating white" = "recording."
In fact, my partner and I didn't notice the white pulsating at all.
A red circular recording symbol is pretty universally accepted to be known as a recording indicator.
Also - there is no downside by adding a more prominent recording symbol.
Regardless of what you think "needs vs wants" are for people, or the fact that smartphones and tablets can record without any outward-facing notification, or the fact that "hey, you're in public - you should assume by now that you're always being recorded," - there is no reason or downside for Apple to not add a more obvious/prominent recording symbol on the outward-facing screen, especially since this can be easily pushed OTA and the hardware to make it happen already exists.
Regardless of anyone's opinion on whether or not it's necessary, there is really no argument to not allow people to know/consent to knowing they are being recorded more obviously, right?
I would love to be challenged (truly) by someone providing an argument as to any downside of implementing a more-prominent recording symbol on the outside of the device so that people can be made aware that they are being recorded.
You may find it unnecessary, but both my poll and many comments on this thread have made it clear that there are people that would love to see it implemented; which means there is a desire to implement it, so why not?
//
Last edited:
I wonder how many spies that law has killed? Reminds me of the cop from Squid Game.
Also, I photograph with Sony cameras made in Japan. They have a silent mode, very useful for weddings in quiet, echo-prone churches or taking photos in museums, libraries, or other places where silence is golden.
Not being facetious, but how would a red recording light on the outward-screen affect the scene being recorded?
Unless, I suppose, you're in a dark room where the light is being reflected off a wall - I don't see how an emitted light would affect the passthrough or recording.
I don't understand.
//
You answered your own question. Low light situations. Reflections. White surfaces.
I don't understand why this would become an issue with the AVP when it hasn't been an issue for more than a decade of digital cameras and mobile phones. People assume when you are pointing a camera or phone in their direction that you may be recording them. Same thing would apply to AVP. In fact, it does more to notify them than the vast majority of devices.
I'm not sure why you keep pulling out bad information to support your point. Your poll is incorrect and self-selecting. You claimed no downside after acknowledging a possible downside.
To me, someone wearing AVP and looking at me is an obvious indication that they may be recording. I think that as the tech shrinks and becomes more invisible (like the Meta Ray-Ban glasses) then some sort of non-bypass-able indicator should be required by law.
Wait, some one is gonna wear an AVP to record a revenge … heck I don’t want any gadgets when I am in bed or where ever that is happening.