's like ray tracing but in the real world. Or a camera that doesn't use lenses, but uses software in their place.
Cubby didn't know how to turn off sigs!
Amazing new camera tech • Page 2
-
Page
of 2 First / Last -
mal 20,481 posts
Seen 8 minutes ago
Registered 11 years ago -
-
Rhythm 2,042 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 2 years agootto wrote:
I think the layman's version is that you have a grid of small lenses set up so that you're taking multiple focal lengths at the same time. You end up with an image that is tiny compared to the pixel count of the sensor but there's oodles of depth information in the file.
Can anyone explain how this works optically? "Light fields" sound up there with midichlorians. Is it just a processor-heavy sharpening tech or is it properly deep depth of field? Sounds gimmicky tbh.
If wizards did it the images could end up being larger than 1mp ;-P -
Sounds totally pointless - here's a thought: just focus properly in the first place!
say no to Eurogamer sigs
-
henro_ben 2,118 posts
Seen 46 minutes ago
Registered 7 years agootto wrote:
It'll probably end up being a gimmick added to mobile phones, but I wonder if there'll be a use for it in medical/scientific circles e.g. images from microscopes perhaps?
Sounds totally pointless - here's a thought: just focus properly in the first place! -
Tomo 13,416 posts
Seen 31 minutes ago
Registered 10 years agoActually, that's a neat point henro: in a lot of the scientific microscopes for imaging cells and whatnot, depth is a pain in the arse, as you have to do multiple scans. That said, I can't imagine this tech is going to be useable on a macro/nanoscale... I imagine medical circles use cameras more than photography too. -
Rhythm 2,042 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 2 years agoDon't think there's any way this is getting added to mobile phones: WTF!?!
I guess it's cheaper than I'd have thought, but still, WTF is with that design? -
Dirtbox 73,646 posts
Seen 8 hours ago
Registered 11 years agoThe design speaks for itself if you look at the cutaway.+1 / Like / Tweet this post
-
Rhythm 2,042 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 2 years ago -
henro_ben 2,118 posts
Seen 46 minutes ago
Registered 7 years agoHmmm... looks a bit awkward to hold and like it'd be easy to drop.
Still not convinced by the quality of the images, only the original focus point actually looks sharp, everything else looks slightly blury, becoming more so as you move away from the focus point.
Vaguely fun clicking on the examples but I can't say I'm anxious to do it for every photo I take... -
ram 3,423 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 8 years agoIt's a clever gimmick and I predict fail.
The kind of people this camera looks like it is aimed at, just want a point and click with a flash so they can take it out on the razzle dazzle. -
Psychotext 49,160 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 7 years agoFirst gen tech though, hopefully someone will find a useful angle to sell it on and development can continue.This post is sponsored by Apple and the iPhone 4S. Think different.
-
ram 3,423 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 8 years agoBeyond the fact it's clever technology, I can't see any real-world advantages to it. Apart from correcting a focusing mistake.
I am more than willing to eat my hat though if it takes off.
-
Psychotext 49,160 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 7 years agoIt should mean that CSI can do their image forensics without the techy amongst us throwing things at the screen. This post is sponsored by Apple and the iPhone 4S. Think different.
-
Rhythm 2,042 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 2 years agoIf it takes a picture of all focal lengths every time, could it be used to improve 3D photography/cinematography? I'm picturing some kind of tech where the image can focus itself correctly based on where you're looking at any time. One of the issues with modern 3D films is that you have to be looking exactly where the director wants you to in order for it to fuly work - this could overcome that shortfall -
It is fantastic tech, but also a missed opportunity IMO. Who's going to spend $500 on it?
They're marketing it as a social media tool - how do you do that if you *have* to edit it before you can post it? Social media users want to snap an image and send it to Facebook, that's it. It's actually MORE hassle. Smartphones are where it's at there.
Photographers might like it, but don't most photographers hate postprocessing, the skill's all in the shot? Does this not take that away? A photographer will surely want a DSLR.
That's why I see it as a shame, and a missed opportunity. Licence the tech, and it'll be in every camera as an option. Light field mode or something. While I'd love to be able to adjust the focus on an image after the event, it'd be better if you still had the ability to focus using the camera itself. As it stands, you're losing convenience.
It's really impressive how the CEO did his dissertation at Stanford on light fields and had the nous to set up the company and actually bring it to market, but if Olympus, Kodak, Sony etc were all involved, costs would plummet and it'd go mass-market.
I love it, but don't know who'd actually buy it.
-
Page
of 2 First / Last
