This makes me think about the truth value of photorealistic fakes. For a genuine photo of good quality we might assign truth value of 1. Though it is only a relative observation product and many more images could be produced from the potential data in the environment. Each additional image can add to a composite truth value. A significantly different viewpoint , another 1 added. We might say B/W only 1/2 true as all the info. interpreted as colour is missing. Any distortion, less than optimal brightness and low resolution can also subtract from the relative truth value. Fidelity adds to truth of a genuine observation product photo. The fake however is truth value 0. Likeness to an existing object, possibly a person, who was not the direct source of the information used to generate the fake, does not increase its truth value. High resolution, no distortion, optimal brightness, full colour -still fake, truth 0. Which means the source of the photorealistic fake must be known or at least that the existing, absolute, thing who's likeness is portrayed was not the 'source of truth' used in its fabrication. That might be difficult to demonstrate.
