How Technology Changes News Photography

San Francisco – How do New York Times journalists use technology in their jobs and in their personal lives? Jim Wilson, a photographer for The Times based in San Francisco, discussed the tech he is using.

You’ve been shooting photos for The Times for years. What was one of the most challenging shoots you’ve ever had to do, and what tools did you use?

I started at The Times in 1980 and have been shooting ever since, with the exception of about a seven-year period when I was an editor.

I’ve had many challenging shoots over the years. One that comes to mind was a trip I took with my colleague Kirk Johnson to St. Lawrence Island, Alaska. We flew with a group of scientists who were doing environmental monitoring at a former United States Air Force radar site there from the Cold War. The place was very eerie (think Dr. Strangelove), and from one location at the site, you really could see Russia. We were dropped off at the edge of a gravel runway for a week of camping in one of the most remote places on the planet. I had to carefully plan out what I was going to shoot and how, since every piece of gear I had was dependent on battery power and there weren’t any sources of electricity to recharge.

We had no transportation to get to the survey sites, so had to hike the tundra to each location, sometimes over several miles. For the most part, the weather cooperated, but there was one night when the wind came up and the sky opened, gushing frigid rain along with the howling wind — I worried that my tent would be blown over.

How has tech changed your photography equipment over the years?

There’s no question that tech has made us much more portable than we ever were. The equipment itself is far more sophisticated and capable — we can see what we are shooting in real time; we can fine tune everything to whatever our needs are. We are now able to transmit our pictures from anywhere we can get an internet connection.

When I started, everything was dependent on processed film, which meant having to bring film, a darkroom kit including enlarging and print making equipment, and a transmitter (very much like a souped up fax machine). We’d have to find or at least arrange for a telephone line and telephone access when we needed to send our images. I remember having a small portable typewriter that I’d use to write the captions that were pasted onto the photos before they were put on the drum transmitter and sent back to The Times. The phone lines were all analog, and each picture took around 10 minutes to send — if the line was interrupted for any reason, we’d have to start over. If we got out 10 images in a day, that was huge.

Photographers now can send wide arrays of photos multiple times during a day. The upside of all of this is more time on the scene providing coverage and more choices sent. When we were strictly a print-based operation, the press deadlines ruled our lives — there was a definite point in the day at which no more changes could be made.

What’s the best camera you’ve ever used?

This is a hard question. I always loved using the Leica cameras I started out with. They were solid and dependable gear that were elegant in their simplicity. I loved my battered M2 and M3, was grateful when Leitz brought forth the M4 and thought having the built-in meter of the M6 was such an amazing advance. These cameras just felt so right and so great in one’s hands — they were quiet and unobtrusive.

Then came autofocus lenses and auto functions on the high-end single lens reflex cameras that rolled out from companies like Canon and Nikon. You can customize these cameras for just about any situation you can imagine. With many of these cameras, one can upload directly without even a laptop. The cameras are capable of recording far more detail in poor lighting conditions then we ever could in the film days.

Camera sales have subsided because people use the cameras on their smartphones. How do you feel about smartphone cameras and their impact on digital photography?

The smartphone has killed the lower-end camera market, and if it hasn’t killed the mid-range market, it’s sure breathing down its neck. Everyone has a camera with them now at all times, and there’s no doubt that we’re seeing images that we never before could have contemplated. As we all know, it’s not just still images but also video.

I think it’s the ultimate democratization of photography — anyone at any time from anywhere can produce images that can affect how we think of the world around us.

With each advance in the cellphone market, I wonder what the long-term prognosis is for the high-end cameras. I attended the launch of Apple’s iPhone X with all of the improvements made on that device, many of them involving photo and video capabilities, and I couldn’t help but wonder if there may be a day when companies like Canon and Nikon won’t have the incentive to make the kind of gear that we as pros now use.

Outside of work, what tech product are you currently obsessed with?

I don’t know if this qualifies as a tech product, but we recently bought a new Subaru that has lane departure warnings and automatic braking. We really had to pay close attention when the salesman was demonstrating all of this and were amazed at how it worked. These are safety features that are important and ought to be standard on all vehicles. I see the self-driving cars that are around the Bay Area and know that though it may not be tomorrow, the future is here.

What do you think about drones and 360-degree cameras?

Drones have opened up a whole new way to look at scenes, and I think they’re an incredible tool. When you can get just a little elevation, it’s fantastic how much more depth you can bring to whatever you are seeing.

As for the 360 views, I’ve seen some that are genuinely amazing. The most successful ones give a sense of place that would be difficult to obtain in any other way. One of the most impressive views that I’ve seen was shot by my former colleague Fred Conrad in Haiti after the earthquake — it was a 360 panoramic still that showed the interior of a quake-destroyed building in incredible detail.

Any way of seeing that helps us to tell a story better is a positive development, and I see a great future for both of these technologies.

The New York Times

UAE Announces Comprehensive Strategy for Fourth Industrial Revolution

London- The Fourth Industrial Revolution Council has announced its intention to come up with a comprehensive strategy on the use of the technological tools of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, whose details will be revealed during the annual meetings of the UAE government on September 26 and 27.

While heading the first meeting of the council, Mohammad al-Gergawi, Minister of Cabinet Affairs and The Future and Chairman of the council, stressed that the UAE has intensified its efforts to keep pace with the revolution’s rapid developments and to become the first clear international model to experiment and implement the technology of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Gerawi added that the UAE is the first country in the world to establish a council with the aim of benefiting from the opportunities provided by the revolution, while preparing to face its challenges, which reflects the directives of the wise leadership to foresee and create the future, and to build an industrial renaissance through advanced technologies with the minds, arms and creativity of the nation, and establish its stature as a country with a futuristic vision.

He stressed that the UAE cabinet will be the first in the world to plan and adopt a framework that will prepare subsequent governments for future challenges under its national agenda.

The meeting showcased tasks of the council members and the challenges and opportunities of the Fourth Industrial Revolution in addition to developing coordination mechanisms and cooperation with federal and domestic parties.

The council, which was established to implement a five-point executive workplan, is headed by al-Gergawi. Its members include Minister of Economy Sultan al-Mansouri, Minister of Education Hussain al-Hammadi and Minister of Happiness Ohood al-Roumi.

The Technology Our Personal Finance Columnist Trusts His Money With

New York- How do New York Times journalists use technology in their jobs and in their personal lives? Ron Lieber, The Times’s Your Money columnist, discussed the tech he’s using.

You’ve been writing financial advice in Your Money for many years. What’s your most important tech tool for getting work done?

Personal finance is indeed deeply personal, and I’ve found over the years that I learn as much from the people who read my work as I do from sources. To tap into that wisdom, I often open up comments on my column and moderate them myself, replying along the way to questions or particularly provocative statements.

But because mine is a weekend column and there are sometimes hundreds of comments to approve by hand, I need to have a laptop with me wherever I go in order to keep up, and the lighter the better. So I lean hard on my MacBook Air (and really abuse the Samsonite Xenon backpack I use to lug it around).

What do you like about it, and what could be better?

Other than the self-loathing I feel about using Apple’s products when it cozies up to China, you mean? I wish the Mac was even lighter and that our employer would give me a couple more to stash in various places.

A while back, I heard the author Gretchen Rubin say something enlightening about how much happier she was when she realized she could have multiple phone chargers and laptop cords instead of just one. I bought myself a Chromebook to use for office meetings (to go with my desktop machine at work and the Mac at home) so I wasn’t lugging the Mac around on the subway even more than I already do.

What’s your favorite fintech app, and why?

I love being able to scan checks and deposit them without doing the whole envelope, stamp, mailbox routine. I haven’t maintained checking accounts at banks with branches in over 15 years, and this helps me keep the streak going. I do find it rather curious, however, that Charles Schwab can suck that paper through the air and into my checking account without much delay but still helps itself to a four-day hold on transfers from my external savings account.

I’ve also been excited for a while to put some allowance apps through their paces, but my 11-year-old is still attached to her Save, Spend and Give jars and the cash and coins that fill them up.

You’ve given savvy advice on buying cars, pouncing on credit card offers, and optimizing retirement savings. What’s your advice for the smartest way to buy tech products?

I have a saying — more like a lament — that I repeat so often that I’ve turned it into a hashtag: Nothing is simple or easy. (Nothing!) #Nisoe. Technology has come a long way, but it is almost never as simple as its marketers suggest. My wife and I have rarely managed to touch any aspect of our audiovisual setup in our apartment without needing to pay someone to actually make it work. Now, hiring tech support in this way is reflexive — a pre-emptive way to buy back time that would surely be lost in figuring the whole thing out and probably failing. So I encourage people to budget for that, whether in hours or dollars.

Beyond your job, what tech product are you currently obsessed with using in your daily life, and what do you and your family do with it?

The infinite Spotify jukebox still seems like a miracle to me, and I’ve found it to be a particularly fun way to introduce my toddler to music. When she was smaller and knew no words, I’d improvise playlists over, say, breakfast-food-related themes: (“Toast and Jelly,” “Starfish and Coffee,” “Breakfast in America”) and then post them on Facebook with a photo to amuse friends and relatives.

Now that she’s putting words together, we riff off those. She just said “amazing” for the first time, so we tuned into Aerosmith and Luther Vandross singing songs with that word in the title. Also Barack Obama on YouTube singing “Amazing Grace.”

Why is Spotify better than alternatives like Apple Music?

I haven’t tried Apple Music, so I’m not sure if it would be any better at this, but it would be neat to be able to post these spontaneous playlists to Facebook with some kind of natural language command so that people could play them with just one click. Why can’t I type (or speak) something obviously recognizable, like “take the last six songs I played and post them to my Facebook account” and have it just happen?

If you could dream up a gadget or app that has yet to exist, what would it be and how much would you be willing to pay for it?

I don’t even know where to start here. Let’s go from cheap to expensive.

A voice (or foot!) operated screen door for when your hands are filled with grilled food or dirty dishes: $10.

An app for all kids’ first phones that allows them to help when they see someone on the street in need of help. Hit one button, and $1 moves from their allowance app to the nearest homeless shelter or food bank. I’d pay $20 for this, but maybe Apple or Google will figure this out themselves and give it away in their app stores.

And how about an app that finally lets me store all of the restaurants I want to try, so I can pull it up whenever I get hungry to remind myself of what is nearby or at the location that I’m heading to? Maybe $25 for this one.

Oh, and something that would fill out camp and school health forms automatically: $1 trillion.

The New York Times

Children Listen to Smartphones more than Parents

Cologne (Germany)- A survey conducted by the Ipsos Research Institute showed that the majority of Germans asserted that electronic devices would have more influence on children than on parents in the future.

Most importantly, children themselves admitted that smartphones will be more important than parents in the future.

According to the survey, 58 percent of Germans believe that future children will listen more to electronic devices than parents; and 55 percent said that schools, teachers, politicians and priests would lose their status in the eyes of the children compared to the impact of the mobile phone.

In the same survey, 60 percent of young people aged 14-24 said they expect the influence of mobile phones on children to outweigh the influence of parents. Only 41 percent said the impact of teachers and schools would be weakened by mobile phone influence.

However, a researcher urged people not to be afraid of the survey’s results, pointing out that parents, family, and friends will always remain the most effective environment for the child. He said that parents, brothers, sisters and friends are always available for him, which is a very important advantage.

He added that losing their status in front of the new generation is not something new for the youth’s circles and schools.

In response to a question about the impact of technology on children in 1997, only 33 percent of Germans believed that electronic devices would outweigh the family’s influence on children.

The German press described the results of the survey as shocking, and reminded of another alarming study of the Pikk-Media project, which included several thousand German schoolchildren from both genders, published a year ago.

This study showed that 60 percent of children failed to resist the temptation to use their devices for more than 30 minutes. Doctors called for more scientific studies on this phenomenon, and criticized weak government support for such studies.

Going Low-Tech to Solve Everyday High-Tech Problems

tech

New York- How do New York Times journalists use technology in their jobs and in their personal lives? Brian X. Chen, The Times’s personal technology writer, who is based in San Francisco, discussed the tech he’s using.

You explain, highlight and solve everyday tech problems for readers. How do you use tech to keep track of the issues and new tech that is coming out?

Twitter, Facebook and Techmeme.com are useful for keeping up with new gadget trends. But when it comes to staying in tune with the tech-induced headaches of average people, I turn to reader emails or conversations with non-techie friends.

Nothing beats listening to people rant about the tech they’re frustrated with. Nearly everyone seems angry about connectivity issues: sluggish, unreliable Wi-Fi, spotty cell coverage or shoddy broadband service. Other than that, battery life continues to be a source of people’s misery.

At The Times, we have access to analytics about the people reading our articles, and the consistent strong readership we get from stories about these topics reaffirms that people continue to be frustrated with these issues.

What kind of testing setup do you use to tell us if a whiz-bang gadget or app or service is for real?

Oftentimes before I start testing a product, I jot down an objective set of tests for tasks that I can reasonably expect a product to do. For example, when I compared virtual assistants last year, I drew up more than a dozen basic tasks related to productivity, music, mapping, dining and entertainment, and ran each assistant through all the tasks to see which was the most competent. After I plugged the results in a spreadsheet, Google’s was superior.

In addition to objective tests, my reviews are subjective. I keep in mind what I know average people care about when it comes to tech, other than a checklist of features. The setup needs to be simple and intuitive, the product needs to be durable and work well, the company’s customer service needs to be delightful and a gadget’s design needs to be aesthetically pleasing enough that you would feel proud about carrying it around or leaving it on your coffee table.

What is the favorite piece of tech you have reviewed for The Times so far?

The Nintendo Switch. If you’re getting paid to play Zelda, you’re winning at life. Plus, it was a fun gadget to test because it was essentially two products in one: a home console that converts into a portable device when you yank the tablet off the dock.

Do you still use it?

Rarely. After finishing Zelda, some of the newer games have been less interesting. But I’m eager to try Super Mario Odyssey when it comes out this fall.

What was your least favorite tech product to review and why?

Probably the Echo Show, Amazon’s smart speaker with a screen built into it.

It’s a decent product, but the problem with reviewing it on Day 1 was that there were no great “Skills,” or third-party apps, available for it yet to get a feel for whether an always-on, always-watching gadget in your home would be useful. Blank-slate products like Echo Show create a dilemma for reviewers. Should we evaluate the product based on what it can do currently (which is very little), or what we think it has the potential to do in the future?

I’m not a fortune teller, so I lean toward the former and render a “wait and see” verdict that seems repetitive. But even when people take the latter approach and predict a gadget’s potential, it’s unhelpful for informing people whether they should buy something today.

Beyond your job, what tech product are you currently obsessed with using in your daily life?

I fell down a rabbit hole with indoor gardening after I bought a so-called smart planter called the Click & Grow. It’s basically a planter with built-in drip irrigation and a timed grow light; you can buy dirt pods containing seeds for growing different types of plants. Even if you lived in a tiny New York apartment with little natural light, you could grow fresh basil, chili peppers and cilantro. What a novelty.

In my kitchen, I’m currently growing basil and scallions, and I’m experimenting with propagating succulents and other types of nonedible house plants with the planter.

What could be better about it?

The pods are too expensive. You can buy them in sets of three for $20, which seems like too much for dirt and seeds.

When you’ve had enough of tech and want to get away, what’s your escape route?

My corgi is the boss of me, so on the weekends you’ll usually find me at a dog park, beach or mountain trail.

The New York Times

China Imposes Restrictions on Investments Abroad

London- China has imposed new restrictions on Chinese companies’ overseas investments, preventing them from working in many sectors, such as sports clubs, hotels, cinemas, real estate and entertainment.

After it long motivated its companies’ overseas acquisitions, Beijing abruptly changed its speech in late 2016, and warned from “irrational” acquisitions.

The Chinese government announced on Friday that overseas investment, which is inconsistent with China’s diplomacy for peaceful development, and the mutually beneficial cooperation and macroeconomic regulation, will be restricted, noting that it wants to “avoid risks”.

The Chinese government added that Chinese companies would not be able to make more investments in countries or regions experiencing wars or those with no diplomatic relations with the country.

The directive also prohibits investments that could harm the interests and security of the country. It referred in particular to the production of “unauthorized” military equipment and technology, pornography and gambling.

The announcement came after Chinese businessman Gao Zhisheng has partnered in the capital of the English football club Thothampton. According to the British press, the Gao family has acquired 80 percent of the shares at about 200 million pounds (220 million euros).

A large number of European clubs have attracted capital from China three years ago: in Spain (Atletico Madrid and Barcelona), in Britain (Aston Villa, West Bromwich and Manchester City), France (Sochaux and Auxerre), and Italy (Inter Milan and AC Milan).

Large Chinese groups in Europe and the United States have also bought stakes in banks, hotels, studios and cinemas.
But China has anxiously considered these acquisitions, which are causing huge indebtedness to China’s financial system, while high-risk acquisitions are being investigated.

Only investments that support the real economy or advanced technology are allowed.

As a result, Chinese investment abroad fell by 46% in the first half of 2017 to $ 48 billion, according to the government.

On Friday, the United States officially launched a commercial investigation into China’s intellectual property practices and the forced transfer of U.S. technology, to which President Donald Trump called this week.

US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said in a statement: “Last Monday, President Trump asked me to review the Chinese laws, policies and practices that could harm intellectual property rights, innovation and US technological development.”

“After negotiations with stakeholders and government agencies, I decided that these critical issues deserve an inclusive investigation,” he said.

Foreign companies have long complained about Beijing’s failure to protect patents. In some cases, Beijing forced institutions to share information with local Chinese partners, as a price that should be paid to invest in the huge Chinese market and set up projects.

However, because foreign companies are afraid of being banned from entering the Chinese market, they have not pressed their governments to take action.

“We will protect intellectual property, patents, trademarks, trade secrets, and any intellectual property that is vital to our security and prosperity,” Lighthizer said. He added that the United States would not again tolerate Beijing’s “theft” of US industrial secrets.

Lighthizer has launched the investigation under the article 301 of the US Trade Law on Intellectual Property. Beijing responded this week by warning that “everyone will lose” if a trade war ignites between the world’s two largest economies.

For their parts, governments of Germany, France and Italy resorted to the European Commission to prevent foreign investors from taking unwanted acquisitions over European companies.

Der Spiegel magazine reported Saturday that German Economy Minister Brigitte Zypries sent a cable to European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker to highlight China’s growing efforts to acquire European technology companies.

In the cable, Zypries called the European countries to reject or restrict such deals.

The German Economy Minister explained that such transactions should not be allowed if there is interference from the state of incoming investments that encourage or support acquisition deals or offering unrealistic prices for contracts.

Despite that the cable assessed the flow of foreign capital as “positive development”, the minister pointed out that China’s unilateral long-term focus on technology and technology has been monitored in the light of China’s 2025 strategy.

The strategy aims to support Chinese industries. The cable pointed out that the Chinese market in return is still closed to European investment in many areas.

The Minister, therefore, called for granting the EU countries additional rights to stand out to unwanted acquisitions. Der Spiegel reported that according to officials from the German Ministry of Economy, the contributions of Chinese companies in Germany have lately increased significantly. According to data, Chinese contributions in the German market 21 transactions since the beginning of this year, more than double compared to the same period last year.

How Technology Might Get Out of Control

Humanity has a method for trying to prevent new technologies from getting out of hand: explore the possible negative consequences, involving all parties affected, and come to some agreement on ways to mitigate them. New research, though, suggests that the accelerating pace of change could soon render this approach ineffective.

People use laws, social norms and international agreements to reap the benefits of technology while minimizing undesirable things like environmental damage. In aiming to find such rules of behavior, we often take inspiration from what game theorists call a Nash equilibrium, named after the mathematician and economist John Nash. In game theory, a Nash equilibrium is a set of strategies that, once discovered by a set of players, provides a stable fixed point at which no one has an incentive to depart from their current strategy.

To reach such an equilibrium, the players need to understand the consequences of their own and others’ potential actions. During the Cold War, for example, peace among nuclear powers depended on the understanding the any attack would ensure everyone’s destruction. Similarly, from local regulations to international law, negotiations can be seen as a gradual exploration of all possible moves to find a stable framework of rules acceptable to everyone, and giving no one an incentive to cheat – because doing so would leave them worse off.

But what if technology becomes so complex and starts evolving so rapidly that humans can’t imagine the consequences of some new action? This is the question that a pair of scientists — Dimitri Kusnezov of the National Nuclear Security Administration and Wendell Jones, recently retired from Sandia National Labs — explore in a recent paper. Their unsettling conclusion: The concept of strategic equilibrium as an organizing principle may be nearly obsolete.

Kusnezov and Jones derive insight from recent mathematical studies of games with many players and many possible choices of action. One basic finding is a sharp division into two types, stable and unstable. Below a certain level of complexity, the Nash equilibrium is useful in describing the likely outcomes. Beyond that lies a chaotic zone where players never manage to find stable and reliable strategies, but cope only by perpetually shifting their behaviors in a highly irregular way. What happens is essentially random and unpredictable.

The authors argue that emerging technologies — especially computing, software and biotechnology such as gene editing — are much more likely to fall into the unstable category. In these areas, disruptions are becoming bigger and more frequent as costs fall and sharing platforms enable open innovation. Hence, such technologies will evolve faster than regulatory frameworks — at least as traditionally conceived — can respond.

What can we do? Kusnezov and Jones don’t have an easy answer. One clear implication is that it’s probably a mistake to copy techniques used for the more slowly evolving and less widely available technologies of the past. This is often the default approach, as illustrated by proposals to regulate gene editing techniques. Such efforts are probably doomed in a world where technologies develop thanks to the parallel efforts of a global population with diverse aims and interests. Perhaps future regulation will itself have to rely on emerging technologies, as some are already exploring for finance.

We may be approaching a profound moment in history, when the guiding idea of strategic equilibrium on which we’ve relied for 75 years will run up against its limits. If so, regulation will become an entirely different game.

Bloomberg

Information, Technology Shares Rise to Unprecedented Levels

London- Prices of information and technology shares stabilized this week, following seven trading sessions that witnessed consecutive rise by which the index sector reached a new historic level.

S&P index of this sector recorded an unprecedented level of 995 points last week before it dropped on Thursday to around 987 points, thus the index rose around 22 percent since the beginning of 2017 until August 2.

Silicon Valley analysts stated that the “sector has overcome the tension that resulted from the election of Donald Trump as the US president, especially when he revealed his intention to reduce the number of immigrants entering the US. Tech and internet firms were the first to object over this because their development and innovation depend on attracting talents from abroad.”

Analysts added that after the relapse of this threat, Silicon Valley firms shares witnessed additional rise that is still ongoing, because there is a clear vision in this sector unlike others. This is also supported by the growing profits not to mention optimistic forecasts made by analysts for the upcoming years.

S&P index, however, has changed in shape and content in 17 years – some firms went bankrupt, others lost its relative significance such as computers and phones industry firms while other firms integrated together. Meanwhile, firms of artificial intelligence, smartphones, social network, online payment, e-commerce and cloud computing were advancing.

Analysts saw that there has been a radical transformation in 17 years from the economy of computers and telecommunications industry to the internet of things. Intel value is now three times less and Cisco is less with 60 percent compared to its value in 2000.

In one year, Apple value rose 50 percent, Alphabet’s Google increased 18 percent, Microsoft inched up 28 percent, Facebook rose 37 percent and Amazon 31 percent.

First Editing of Human Embryos in the US

London- Technology that allows alteration of genes in a human embryo has been used for the first time in the United States, according to Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) in Portland, which carried out the research.

The OHSU research is believed to have broken new ground both in the number of embryos experimented upon and by demonstrating it is possible to safely and efficiently correct defective genes that cause inherited diseases, according to Technology Review, which first reported the news.

None of the embryos were allowed to develop for more than a few days, according to Reuters which saw the report. Some countries have signed a convention prohibiting the practice on concerns it could be used to create so-called designer babies.

Results of the peer-reviewed study are expected to be published soon in a scientific journal, according to OHSU spokesman Eric Robinson.

The research, led by Shoukhrat Mitalipov, head of OHSU’s Center for Embryonic Cell and Gene Therapy, involves a technology known as CRISPR that has opened up new frontiers in genetic medicine because of its ability to modify genes quickly and efficiently.

CRISPR works as a type of molecular scissors that can selectively trim away unwanted parts of the genome, and replace it with new stretches of DNA. Scientists in China have published similar studies with mixed results.

In December 2015, scientists and ethicists at an international meeting held at the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in Washington said it would be “irresponsible” to use gene editing technology in human embryos for therapeutic purposes, such as to correct genetic diseases, until safety and efficacy issues are resolved.

But earlier this year, NAS and the National Academy of Medicine said scientific advances make gene editing in human reproductive cells “a realistic possibility that deserves serious consideration.”

How to Use Google Image Search on the Go

google

Q. On a computer, you can use Google’s reverse image search feature in several ways, like dragging and dropping an image file in the search box or right-clicking on an image file on a web page. But how can you do reverse searches for pictures using a mobile device?

A. Third-party apps and sites for hunting down images are available, but Google offers its own way to use its image search engine if you are using a tablet or smartphone at the time. On a computer, you drag a file into the search box (or right-click it) to do a reverse search for similar images on the web. On a mobile device with the Chrome browser for Android and iOS, you start with a photo that has already popped up in the search results.

When you have an image you want to research in the Chrome app, tap it to open the photo to a full-screen view. Next, press and hold your finger on the screen and choose “Search Google for this image.” The results page returns other web pages where Google has found that particular image, often with text accompanying it for additional information.

Another method in the Chrome app involves switching to the desktop version of the Google image search page by tapping the menu button in the top-right corner and selecting “Request Desktop Site.” Once you are on the desktop version of the page, tap the camera icon in the search bar. You can now choose a file to upload from your device’s photo app or from an online file-storage site.

You can also take a picture of something and instantly upload the photo to the Google image search. (The process might be seen as a rudimentary precursor to the new Google Lens tool, announced at the company’s I/O conference last month, which uses a smartphone’s camera to gather more information about your surroundings in real time.)

The New York Times