Spatial Reframing will fix your bad iPhone photos with iOS 27


Apple’s iOS 27 software update will add Spatial Reframing, a feature that will allow users to change the position and angle of a photo even after it has been taken.

Spatial Reframing was announced as part of the WWDC 2026 opening keynote. It’s set to be made available to iPhone owners when the iOS 27 update is released to the public this fall.

Part of Apple Intelligence, the Spatial Reframing feature uses Apple’s Private Cloud Compute and on-device spatial models. That means it’s private and fast to use on Apple’s latest iPhones.

In use, iPhone owners will edit a photo and tap a new “reframe” button. They’ll then be able to drag and zoom the image to get the composition that they like best.

Users can also expand images with the Extend tool to give their subjects a better framing too. For example, users can straighten a crooked horizon without cropping out anything important, or adjust the aspect ratio, and Extend will fill in the missing pieces.

Clean Up hasn’t been left behind, with Apple saying that it will “remove distractions with better quality and more realistic infill.” What that means isn’t yet clear.

For what it’s worth, this Spatial Reframing was the subject that generated the most chatter in the AppleInsider newsroom during the keynote.

Generative AI-based images

Notably, the photo will have blurred edges during the editing process. Once complete, Apple uses content from the original photo to feed its generative AI pipeline to replace the blur.

This approach, Apple says, ensures that the machine-generated edges of the image won’t look out of place. We’ll need to see how well Spatial Reframing works with our own photos before we can judge how accurate that claim is.

Apple also confirmed that the new Spatial Reframing feature will work with existing photos. It’ll also work with photos that were taken using other devices, not just iPhones.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


“It was severely downgraded,” Gilbert confirms. “I never would have found it if I was just looking through Google results.” (I tried the same prompt in Gemini earlier this month, and after an initial denial, the tool also gave me Eiger’s number.)

After this experience, Eiger, Gilbert, and another UW PhD student, Anna-Maria Gueorguieva, decided to test ChatGPT to see what it would surface about a professor. 

At first, OpenAI’s guardrails kicked in, and ChatGPT responded that the information was unavailable. But in the same response, the chatbot suggested, “if you want to go deeper, I can still try a more ‘investigative-style’ approach.” Their inquiry just had to help “narrow things down,” ChatGPT said, by providing “a neighborhood guess” for where the professor might live, or “a possible co-owner name” for the professor’s home. ChatGPT continued: “That’s usually the only way to surface newer or intentionally less-visible property records.” 

The students provided this information, leading ChatGPT to produce the professor’s home address, home purchase price, and spouse’s name from city property records. 

(Taya Christianson, an OpenAI representative, said she was not able to comment on what happened in this case without seeing screenshots or knowing which model the students had tested, even after we pointed out that many users may not know which model they were using in the ChatGPT interface. She also declined to comment generally about the exposure of PII by the chatbot, instead providing links to documents describing how OpenAI handles privacy, including filtering out PII, and other tools.) 

This reveals one of the fundamental problems with chatbots, says DeleteMe’s Shavell. AI companies “can build in guardrails, but [their chatbots] are also designed to be effective and to answer customer questions.”

The exposure issue is not limited to Gemini or ChatGPT. Last year, Futurism found that if you prompted xAI’s chatbot Grok with “[name] address,” in almost all cases, it provided not only residential addresses but also often the person’s phone numbers, work addresses, and addresses for people with similar-sounding names. (xAI did not respond to a request for comment.) 

No clear answers

There aren’t straightforward solutions to this problem—there’s no easy way to either verify whether someone’s personal information is in a given model’s training set or to compel the models to remove PII. 



Source link