Tag Archives: editing

ACE Eddie Awards Nominations: ‘Oppenheimer’, ‘Barbie’, ‘Anatomy Of A Fall’ & More Vie For Editing Prizes – Deadline

  1. ACE Eddie Awards Nominations: ‘Oppenheimer’, ‘Barbie’, ‘Anatomy Of A Fall’ & More Vie For Editing Prizes Deadline
  2. Awards & Events: ACE Eddie Nominees, AfroAnimation Returns, ‘Bluey’ Honored by PETA, SIGGRAPH Sets First Keynote Animation Magazine
  3. ‘Past Lives,’ ‘Maestro,’ ‘Anatomy of a Fall,’ ‘Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour’ Among ACE Eddie Awards Nominations Variety
  4. 2024 ACE Eddie Award Nominations: See the Full List IndieWire
  5. ‘Barbie,’ ‘Oppenheimer’ Among Editors’ Eddie Nominees Hollywood Reporter

Read original article here

TikTokers are flocking to the viral photo app Remini for AI-generated corporate headshots, but some say it’s editing their bodies beyond recognition – Yahoo Entertainment

  1. TikTokers are flocking to the viral photo app Remini for AI-generated corporate headshots, but some say it’s editing their bodies beyond recognition Yahoo Entertainment
  2. ‘Why Pay a Photographer?’: Generation Z Go Wild for AI-Generated Headshots PetaPixel
  3. Gen Zers are using apps like Remini and Canva to turn selfies into A.I.-generated professional headshots while saving big money Fortune
  4. People issue warning after using AI app to create professional headshots UNILAD
  5. How to get the viral AI Headshots filter on TikTok Dexerto
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

New Zealand’s national broadcaster probes ‘inappropriate’ editing of Ukraine war stories – Yahoo News

  1. New Zealand’s national broadcaster probes ‘inappropriate’ editing of Ukraine war stories Yahoo News
  2. New Zealand public radio apologizes for publishing ‘pro-Kremlin garbage’ after wire stories altered The Associated Press
  3. New Zealand’s national broadcaster probes ‘inappropriate’ editing of Ukraine war stories | WION WION
  4. Radio New Zealand employee placed on leave amid investigation into pro-Russia editing of Ukraine reports The Guardian
  5. Radio New Zealand Editor Busted Adding Secret Putin Propaganda The Daily Beast
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Dual CRISPR Gene Editing Strategy Cures Animals of HIV-1 – Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

  1. Dual CRISPR Gene Editing Strategy Cures Animals of HIV-1 Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News
  2. UNMC, Temple research increases chances of eliminating HIV infection University of Nebraska Medical Center
  3. Dual CRISPR therapy plus long-acting ART eliminates HIV in mice FierceBiotech
  4. CRISPR editing of CCR5 and HIV-1 facilitates viral elimination in antiretroviral drug-suppressed virus-infected humanized mice | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences pnas.org
  5. Chances of eliminating HIV infection increased by novel dual gene-editing approach Medical Xpress
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Steven Spielberg regrets editing the guns out of E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial – The A.V. Club

  1. Steven Spielberg regrets editing the guns out of E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial The A.V. Club
  2. Spielberg blasts revising old films for modern audiences, admits ‘mistake’ in editing guns from ‘E.T.’ Fox News
  3. Steven Spielberg Regrets Editing Guns Out of ‘E.T.,’ Says ‘No Film Should Be Revised’ for Today’s Standards: ‘That Was a Mistake’ Yahoo Entertainment
  4. “That Was A Mistake”: Steven Spielberg Admits He Regrets Removing Guns From E.T. Screen Rant
  5. Steven Spielberg Has Finally Admitted He Ruined E.T. Giant Freakin Robot
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Steven Spielberg Regrets Editing Guns Out of ‘E.T.,’ Says ‘No Film Should Be Revised’ for Today’s Standards: ‘That Was a Mistake’ – Variety

  1. Steven Spielberg Regrets Editing Guns Out of ‘E.T.,’ Says ‘No Film Should Be Revised’ for Today’s Standards: ‘That Was a Mistake’ Variety
  2. Spielberg blasts revising old films for modern audiences, admits ‘mistake’ in editing guns from ‘E.T.’ Fox News
  3. Steven Spielberg Regrets Editing Guns Out Of ‘E.T.’: “That Was A Mistake” Yahoo Entertainment
  4. Steven Spielberg Regrets His Mistake of Editing Guns Out of E.T. MovieWeb
  5. Steven Spielberg Wishes He Didn’t Edit the Guns Out of ‘E.T’ We Got This Covered
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

OpenShot 3.0 Released With Many Open-Source Video Editing Enhancements

Show Your Support: This site is primarily supported by advertisements. Ads are what have allowed this site to be maintained on a daily basis for the past 18+ years. We do our best to ensure only clean, relevant ads are shown, when any nasty ads are detected, we work to remove them ASAP. If you would like to view the site without ads while still supporting our work, please consider our ad-free Phoronix Premium.

For those thinking about what open-source non-linear video editor to try out this holiday season for any videos, OpenShot 3.0 was officially released today as a big step forward for that project.

OpenShot 3.0 has been in the works for the past year and brings more than one thousand reported improvements. OpenShot 3.0 enjoys better stability and lower memory use, better video playback performance, support for exporting multiple clips and videos at the same time, better video format support, Blender 3.3 integration, HiDPI multi-monitor support, documentation improvements, and an array of other significant enhancements to this free software video editing solution.

The video below from the OpenShot project covers more of the v3.0 enhancements in detail:

Downloads and more details on the OpenShot 3.0 open-source video editor release via OpenShot.org.

Read original article here

CRISPR tools found in thousands of viruses could boost gene editing

A systematic sweep of viral genomes has revealed a trove of potential CRISPR-based genome-editing tools.

CRISPR–Cas systems are common in the microbial world of bacteria and archaea, where they often help cells to fend off viruses. But an analysis1 published on 23 November in Cell finds CRISPR–Cas systems in 0.4% of publicly available genome sequences from viruses that can infect these microbes. Researchers think that the viruses use CRISPR–Cas to compete with one another — and potentially also to manipulate gene activity in their host to their advantage.

Some of these viral systems were capable of editing plant and mammalian genomes, and possess features — such as a compact structure and efficient editing — that could make them useful in the laboratory.

“This is a significant step forward in the discovery of the enormous diversity of CRISPR–Cas systems,” says computational biologist Kira Makarova at the US National Center for Biotechnology Information in Bethesda, Maryland. “There is a lot of novelty discovered here.”

DNA-cutting defences

Although best known as a tool used to alter genomes in the laboratory, CRISPR–Cas can function in nature as a rudimentary immune system. About 40% of sampled bacteria and 85% of sampled archaea have CRISPR–Cas systems. Often, these microbes can capture pieces of an invading virus’s genome, and store the sequences in a region of their own genome, called a CRISPR array. CRISPR arrays then serve as templates to generate RNAs that direct CRISPR-associated (Cas) enzymes to cut the corresponding DNA. This can allow microbes carrying the array to slice up the viral genome and potentially stop viral infections.

Viruses sometimes pick up snippets of their hosts’ genomes, and researchers had previously found isolated examples of CRISPR–Cas in viral genomes. If those stolen bits of DNA give the virus a competitive advantage, they could be retained and gradually modified to better serve the viral lifestyle. For example, a virus that infects the bacterium Vibrio cholera uses CRISPR–Cas to slice up and disable DNA in the bacterium that encodes antiviral defences2.

Molecular biologist Jennifer Doudna and microbiologist Jillian Banfield at the University of California, Berkeley, and their colleagues decided to do a more comprehensive search for CRISPR–Cas systems in viruses that infect bacteria and archaea, known as phages. To their surprise, they found about 6,000 of them, including representatives of every known type of CRISPR–Cas system. “Evidence would suggest that these are systems that are useful to phages,” says Doudna.

The team found a wide range of variations on the usual CRISPR–Cas structure, with some systems missing components and others unusually compact. “Even if phage-encoded CRISPR–Cas systems are rare, they are highly diverse and widely distributed,” says Anne Chevallereau, who studies phage ecology and evolution at the French National Centre for Scientific Research in Paris. “Nature is full of surprises.”

Small but efficient

Viral genomes tend to be compact, and some of the viral Cas enzymes were remarkably small. This could offer a particular advantage for genome-editing applications, because smaller enzymes are easier to shuttle into cells. Doudna and her colleagues focused on a particular cluster of small Cas enzymes called Casλ, and found that some of them could be used to edit the genomes of lab-grown cells from thale cress (Arabidopsis thaliana), wheat, as well as human kidney cells.

The results suggest that viral Cas enzymes could join a growing collection of gene-editing tools discovered in microbes. Although researchers have uncovered other small Cas enzymes in nature, many of those have so far been relatively inefficient for genome-editing applications, says Doudna. By contrast, some of the viral Casλ enzymes combine both small size and high efficiency.

In the meantime, researchers will continue to search microbes for potential improvements to known CRISPR–Cas systems. Makarova anticipates that scientists will also be looking for CRISPR–Cas systems that have been picked up by plasmids — bits of DNA that can be transferred from microbe to microbe.

“Each year we have thousands of new genomes becoming available, and some of them are from very distinct environments,” she says. “So it’s really going to be interesting.”

Read original article here

Amber Heard was accused of editing photos of her bruises during her defamation trial. Unsealed documents show her team accused Johnny Depp of the same thing.

Amber Heard and Johnny Depp sued one another for defamation. The trial made national news.Reuters/Reuters

  • Amber Heard’s team said a forensic analysis questioned the authenticity of injury photos submitted by Johnny Depp.

  • Heard was also accused of editing photos of alleged abuse during their defamation trial.

  • Nearly 6,000 pages of documents from the Depp-Heard trial were unsealed this weekend.

Amber Heard’s lawyers accused Johnny Depp of editing photos of his scratches and bruises, as well as audio of Heard, that was submitted as part of their defamation trial earlier this year, according to newly revealed court documents.

Heard’s team, including lawyers Benjamin Rotterborn and Elaine Bredehoft, claimed that metadata from photos submitted by Depp’s team contained dates showing the photos were modified years after they were taken, according to a motion request from December 2021 that was unsealed over the weekend and reviewed by The Daily Beast.

Among the alleged discrepancies was one photo that had a creation date of 2019, even though the photo was supposedly taken in 2015, according to the motion. Another photo did not have a creation date but had a modified date of July 2020, Heard’s team said.

The team also requested Depp produce “all recordings containing Ms. Heard’s voice,” the request shows, but alleged the audio files provided had been edited. Heard’s team requested the full audio.

Forensic expert Julian Ackert, who was hired by Heard’s team to review the photo and audio documents from Depp, questioned their authenticity, The Daily Beast reported.

“Missing creation dates and/or modification dates that post-date the facts can be a sign of digital evidence manipulation,” Heard’s team said of Ackert’s analysis.

The court ruled to exclude Ackert’s testimony during the trial, according to a motion filed by Depp’s team.

Depp’s team argued that the “modified” dates Ackert referred to signified when the image was last saved and said that Ackert’s findings would create “unfair prejudice” that would “mislead the jury.”

Heard came under scrutiny during the trial after two images of her bruises from May 2016 were shown side-by-side during the trial, with one image noticeably redder than the other.

Depp’s team alleged Heard edited the photos in order to make her face “look more red,” which Heard denied. Heard said the photos were different due to lighting.

Depp’s lawyer then brought witnesses who said they had not noticed bruises on Heard’s face at the time.

Ackert testified during the trial that Heard’s photos were original. Depp’s forensic witness, Bryan Neumeister, testified that he could not verify whether or not the photos were altered.

A lawyer for Depp did not immediately respond to Insider’s request for comment.

Read the original article on Insider

Read original article here

Scientists accidentally create super-vicious HAMSTERS in lab after gene editing test goes wrong

Scientists accidentally create super-vicious HAMSTERS in a lab after gene editing experiment goes wrong and makes aggressive rodents chase, bite and pin each other down

  • Gene editing lab test inadvertently makes horde of rage-fuelled hamsters
  • Scientists removed key hormone in the hope it would boost animals’ cooperation
  • But it turned them wild, prompting chasing, biting and pinning among hamsters
  • ‘We [thought] it would reduce aggression. But the opposite happened’: test chief
  • ‘We don’t understand this system as well as we thought we did’, Professor added 

Scientists inadvertently bred a horde of unusually aggressive hamsters after a gene editing experiment to ‘reduce aggression’ went wrong.

Researchers at Georgia State University produced new rodents without hormone vasopressin in an effort to raise ‘social communication’ between the rodents.

Yet the chemical change turned the Syrian hamsters wild, prompting fights inside cages.

The ultra-vicious hamsters were pictured pinning, biting and chasing each other.

The scientists shared images of the genetically modified hamsters going at it in their cages

Hamsters are typically social animals with low levels of aggression and an ease of cooperation

Lead researcher Professor Elliott Albers said: ‘We anticipated […] we would reduce both aggression and social communication — but the opposite happened.’

They key hormone Avpr1a was thought to regulate friendship and bonding, with its removal expected to increase harmony between the animals.

Instead, the lab experiment recorded ‘high levels of aggression towards other same-sex individuals’.

Professor Albers said: ‘We were really surprised at the results.’

It was thought that vasopressin affects the social behaviours of hamsters including aggression and communication.

CRISPR is a gene editing technique in which scientists can ‘snip’ a section of someone’s DNA

To investigate further, scientists deactivated Avpr1a, removing a receptor that interacts with vasopressin in key regions of the brain.

Now immune to the hormone, it was thought the rodents would become friendlier.

The results were anything but, with a heightened frequency of fighting, biting, chasing and pinning down among the hamsters in their cages. 

The study’s striking conclusions challenge scientists’ understanding of the relationship between biology and behaviour.

The professor added: We don’t understand this system as well as we thought we did. 

‘The counterintuitive findings tell us we need to start thinking about the actions of these receptors across entire circuits of the brain, not just in specific brain regions.

‘Developing gene-edited hamsters was not easy. But it is important to understand that the neurocircuitry involved in human social behaviour and our model has […] relevance for human health.’

Professor Albers said the gene editing tests are intended to help find solutions to neuropsychiatric disorders including autism and depression.

HOW DOES CRISPR DNA EDITING WORK? 

The CRISPR gene editing technique is being used an increasing amount in health research because it can change the building blocks of the body.

At a basic level, CRISPR works as a DNA cutting-and-pasting operation.

Technically called CRISPR-Cas9, the process involves sending new strands of DNA and enzymes into organisms to edit their genes. 

In humans, genes act as blueprints for many processes and characteristics in the body – they dictate everything from the colour of your eyes and hair to whether or not you have cancer.  

The components of CRISPR-Cas9 – the DNA sequence and the enzymes needed to implant it – are often sent into the body on the back of a harmless virus so scientists can control where they go.

Cas9 enzymes can then cut strands of DNA, effectively turning off a gene, or remove sections of DNA to be replaced with the CRISPRs, which are new sections sent in to change the gene and have an effect they have been pre-programmed to produce.

But the process is controversial because it could be used to change babies in the womb – initially to treat diseases – but could lead to a rise in ‘designer babies’ as doctors offer ways to change embryos’ DNA. 

Source: Broad Institute 

Read original article here