Hands on: Are Google’s new photo editing features a gimmick, or powerful software in disguise?


Yesterday’s 2013 Google I/O developers’ conference keynote was filled with a ton of news, but one of the many highlights was Google’s new emphasis on photography with its Google+ social networking platform. (If you missed the news, you can catch up here.)

With the new photo features, Google’s aim is to implement powerful-yet-automated tools that help users create better images. To achieve great looking photos, Senior VP Vic Gundotra said traditionally people use “powerful tools that require lots of skills that run on expensive machines and take a lot of time…time that many of us don’t have.” But Google claims that its new auto, one-touch features can pull off the same results (and more) without a lot of user input. 

“All you have to do is upload your images,” Gundotra said.

Automatic photo editing features aren’t new – almost every photo-editing program, including Google’s Picasa, has a one-touch solution. But most of them don’t work that well. Google’s new features promise not only to work, but add a professional quality to them. Has Google finally figure out a way to help us refine and add some fun to our photos, not just dump them in the cloud? We took an early spin at some of these features. Here are our first impressions.

Auto Highlight

The basic concept of Auto Highlight is that Google will help you sort through your vast collection of photos and showcase the best ones from a particular album. The software will weed out blurry, duplicate, and poorly exposed images. It’ll also select photos that it thinks are interesting or have some sort of relevance in your life. On stage, Gundotra demonstrated the feature with 600 vacation photos he took in New Zealand; we did not have that many per album, but we uploaded a fair amount to give the feature a proper whirl.

After we uploaded the photos (which can take a while, depending on your upload speed, photo size, the quantity, and if it’s being enhanced), we noticed the software did a good job at picking out faces – even blurry ones – which you can tag right away or skip for later.  Where it stumbled is actually highlighting what it considers to be the best photos. In nearly all our albums, Google displayed too many similar-looking photos. Some were blurry and some clearly had exposure issues. If we were to curate this front page of our best photos, we certainly would not have chosen what the software did.

Out of the 139 photos in this album, Auto Highlight gravitated toward similar photos. It failed to pick out any of the shots of our friends.
Auto Highlight picked six similar photos and placed them at the top. They aren’t even the best or most interesting photos in that album.


Auto Enhance

This is the feature we looked forward to. With online photography, we generally treat the cloud as a dumping ground. We agree with Gundotra that we are oftentimes just too tired or lazy to edit our photos; having a computer do it – and do it well, Photoshop-pro style – would be most welcomed. Much of this tech stems from Google’s acquisition of Nik Software. (The Google+ photo team set up a website that shows images in their original form and ones that have been Auto Enhanced.)

In our tests, we found this feature to be a mixed bag. When you enable the Auto Enhance feature on a photo, it takes a few seconds to do its thing. Granted, we aren’t always the greatest photographers and we have plenty of bad photos, which we intentionally uploaded to see if Google can fix them. Part of the claim is that the Auto Enhance feature can fix photos with bad exposure or noise, for example (the process is entirely automated). We also uploaded some great photos (if we do say so ourselves) just to see what more Google can do to them. 

For most of our photos, Auto Enhance likes to simply oversaturate the colors and adjust the exposure and contrast to bring out some of the details. This can work well sometimes, but we found that in some situations it makes the colors look unappealing or increases the noise level. We tried it with a photo that was taken with a camera’s built-in high dynamic range mode, so the colors were already sufficiently pumped up; Auto Enhance pumped it up even more that the photo’s colors look even more exaggerated. In one photo, the colors were so amped in the objects around a rainbow that it looked lost. In a nighttime photo of a group of people, the faces looked washed out and actually lost some of the details in the original. With a photo of a beach scene, staring straight at a setting sun, Auto Enhance was able to bring up some of the details, but the noise level increased significantly. One of the things we have issues with when shooting indoors with a point-and-shoot is an ugly yellow cast produced by the lights. Auto Enhance is suppose to fix the white balance in photos, but it didn’t seem to offer any improvements with one such photo. In a nighttime shot that was already noisy and blurry, Auto Enhance only made it worse by increasing the noise and brightening areas that were already difficult to make out.

Before (left) and after. Sometimes the enhancements are subtle.
Perhaps it’s subjective, but we prefer the original on the left. The Auto Enhanced photo on the right gives the photo a toy camera vignette effect, but looks less natural.
Auto Enhance increased the noise in this nighttime handheld shot (right) without really adding any benefits to the photo.

Where it did work was a nighttime shot of the Chicago skyline. We had taken this photo on a tripod, so it was a clear photo that we were already happy with. Here, Auto Enhance increased the brightness as usual, but it worked. The skyscrapers’ enhanced lights made the buildings come to life, although we wish it had kept the night background darker. In a photo of Independence Hall in Philadelphia, what originally looked gray turned into a sharper image with a bright blue sky. Photos taken under cloudy or overcast skies benefit, too.

The enhanced photo on the right now has some depth and made the skyline come to life.

What makes a photo great is subjective. Some people really like the HDR intense color effect, while some think it ruins the photo. However, we felt that the Auto Enhance doesn’t always deliver its promises. It depends on the photos: sometimes it either added nothing special, or made things worse, but then there are photos that come alive when Google applies the enhancement. You’ll have to play around and decide if the enhanced photo is to your liking.

Note, however, that the changes aren’t permanent; you can always revert back to the original. But the one nice thing we want to point out is that easy-to-use photo-editing functionalities like these help people realize that the photos taken with their phones and cameras aren’t always the end-story. You can always make a few tweaks to make them better (or worse).

Auto Awesome

As the name might suggest, this feature is designed to help you view your photos in cool ways that you might never have considered, and it does it behind the scenes when you’re uploading the photos. Examples include automatically creating animated GIFs of photos taken in burst mode, collages of similar portraits, implementing HDR, and more. There’s no button to press; Google automatically does it for you. At first use, we couldn’t find any examples of these features in our albums – granted, our albums may not contain thousands of photos, but we did upload some burst shots and portraits – which left us wondering if something was broken.

The differences are subtle, but the photo on the right was newly created using Auto Awesome’s “Best Smile” feature.

Then, huzzah! Upon revisiting our albums after a few hours, we noticed an animated GIF had appeared. And then, Google automatically created a new “best smile” photo from a set of similar photos. A second batch of photo uploads yielded an animated GIF instantly. It confirms that the software does continuously learn and adapt as Google’s algorithms scans your photos. (A small icon in the corner of a photo indicates that it’s a newly created Auto Awesome image.) But out of the hundreds of photos we uploaded that we thought could have benefited from some Google magic, there weren’t many to be found.


To truly benefit from the new features you need to have a huge collection of photos to notice the effects. Uploading a few images won’t give you the desired experience. This reviewer rarely uses Google+. Most of my photos are stored mainly on Flickr (since 2005), so it was a slight challenge in getting enough photos uploaded to properly test out the new features. It wasn’t until we dumped hundreds of photos into our account that we were able to get a good sense of how effective the features can be. Our first impressions: There’s a lot of promise and some of the Auto Awesome features worked eventually, but they all need more refinement. Auto Highlight needs to do a better job in curating the photos it displays, while the seemingly magical Auto Enhance isn’t 100-percent foolproof. 

When we watched the demo of the features, we were excited and couldn’t wait to try them out. After all, never having to dabble with Photoshop or any photo editing software would be great for casual users. However, the infancy of these new technologies left us wanting more. Plus, if Google hopes to convert users from Facebook or Flickr, we wish there was a way to easily export from our existing albums to Google+ (we understand competition, but we can dream, can’t we?).

Granted, we took a quick early spin and it takes time for new features to come up to speed, so we can’t make a final judgment call, yet. We don’t doubt that these features work, and we are talking about Google. The nice part is that the software continues to learn and adapt as the photo collection grows, so here’s hoping that our second-take will yield a far better experience. In the meantime, we will continue to test out the features (some of Digital Trends’ Google+-loving staffers are already putting them to work on their photo collections) and provide you with updates as they come. Kudos to Google for adding some potentially great features to online photo hosting (Flickr should take note), but, as it stands, the features touted can oftentimes feel more gimmicky than useful.


Google’s Stadia is the future of gaming, and that’s bad news for our planet

Google’s upcoming Stadia cloud gaming service, and its competitors, are ready to change the way gamers play, but in doing so they may kick off a new wave of data center growth – with unfortunate consequences for the environment.

Tired of choosing between Windows and Mac? Check out these Chromebooks instead

We've compiled a list of the best Chromebooks -- laptops that combine great battery life, comfortable keyboards, and the performance it takes to run Google's lightweight Chrome OS. From Samsung to Acer, these are the Chromebooks that really…
Smart Home

These are the 13 best games to play on your new Google Home

Google Home is a handy device, but did you know you can play games with it? There are a ton to play, and we tested them all. Here are some of favorites that you can play on your Google Home device.

YouTube Red is now YouTube Premium. What's changed, and should you subscribe?

Thanks to Google, YouTube Red is now YouTube Premium. We explain what exactly a YouTube Premium subscription gets you, how much it costs, and break down if it's a good choice for you.

Sweet 16: Wacom’s Cintiq 16 pen display makes retouching photos a breeze

Wacom’s Cintiq pen displays are usually reserved for the pros (or wealthy enthusiasts), but the new Cintiq 16 brings screen and stylus editing to an approachable price. Does it cut too much to get there?

China bans selfies at gigantic Aperture Spherical Telescope

You can't take a selfie with the world's largest single-dish radio telescope anymore, as the Chinese government has banned everything from smartphones to digital cameras in the surrounding 5-kilometer area.
Emerging Tech

Awesome Tech You Can’t Buy Yet: Robots that eat landmines and clean your floors

Check out our roundup of the best new crowdfunding projects and product announcements that hit the web this week. You may not be able to buy this stuff yet, but it's fun to gawk!

Light on price but rich on features, these are the best cameras for students

Need pro-level features on a budget? The best cameras for students mix advanced features with a more palatable price point. From $2K entry level full frame cameras to $600 budget picks, here are five of the best cameras for students.

After controversial video, China bans ‘Leica’ on social media

A video that referenced Tiananmen Square got the name of the camera company Leica banned from the social media platform Weibo. Leica says the video wasn't an officially sanctioned promotion.

Photography News: Instagram’s disappearing likes, the best photos of the year

In this week's Photography News, see why Instagram is testing a version that excludes the number of likes a post gets. Also, see the impressive winners from two photography contests and the latest features coming to the Fujifilm X-T3.

Panasonic Lumix S1R vs. Sony A7R III: Which pixel-shift powerhouse is better?

The Lumix S1R and Sony A7R III are different in design, but similar in performance, and both offer pixel-shift high resolution modes which pull even more detail out of their already high-resolution sensors. Here's how they compare.

Earn more likes on your photos with the best cameras for Instagram

Looking to snap better Instagrams? Instagram doesn't demand high-resolution files, but upgrading your camera can deliver better bokeh and low-light quality. Here our the best cameras for Instagram.

Capture life in every direction with the best 360 cameras

While 360 cameras are still a new technology, that doesn't mean there's not a few that are worth a look. Whether you want to shoot from the middle or just need a simple, affordable option, here are the best 360 cameras on the market.

These point-and-shoot cameras make your smartphone pics look like cave paintings

If your smartphone camera isn't giving you the results you want, maybe it's time to step up your game. The latest and greatest point-and-shoot cameras offer large sensors, tough bodies, and long lenses -- something no phone can touch.