| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Shoot First and Focus Later
Anthony Soufflé, Photographer
 |
Ogden | UT | USA | Posted: 2:12 AM on 06.22.11 |
->> "The company’s technology allows a picture’s focus to be adjusted after it is taken. While viewing a picture taken with a Lytro camera on a computer screen, you can, for example, click to bring people in the foreground into sharp relief, or switch the focus to the mountains behind them."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/22/technology/22camera.html?hp |
|
Mark Goldman, Photographer
|
Silver Spring | MD | USA | Posted: 8:58 AM on 06.22.11 |
| ->> I wonder if they can do something about ref_ass? ;-) |
|
Simon Wheeler, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Ithaca | NY | USA | Posted: 10:33 AM on 06.22.11 |
| ->> At least you will now be able to choose whether to have the ref's ass in focus or not. |
|
Dennis Wierzbicki, Photographer
|
Plainfield | IL | USA | Posted: 10:42 AM on 06.22.11 |
->> Video of the Lytro camera:
http://online.wsj.com/video/camera-start-up-offers-a-whole-new-perspective/...
I personally question the wisdom of Lytro producing the camera itself. Being the manufacturer adds layer upon layer of complexity to what will already be a difficult introduction, IMO. Unless I've missed something in all the articles floating around the Web today, Lytro has absolutely no experience making and marketing cameras.
In addition, Lytro is positioning themselves to go head to head with companies who have been in the camera business for decades and that have almost limitless funding for R&D. If Lytro is successful, how long before Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Nokia, et al, pour millions into developing their own technology, thereby burying this little start-up?
Why not just license the technology to camera OEM's, in a move similar to "Intel Inside", something like "Lytro Inside"? Doing this would allow Lytro to focus (pun intended) on keeping their version of light field technology on the leading edge and let the companies that are manufacturing cameras do what they do best: design, develop, distribute and sell cameras. |
|
Derick Hingle, Photographer
|
Hammond | LA | USA | Posted: 6:19 PM on 06.22.11 |
->> If this were to actually happen how does the ethics of photography come into play? I would guess that anything created with this sort of technology would be an illustration and not a photograph.
I've read several stories on this new system for creating photos I am intrigued and at the same time concerned how this could impact photographers in the future. |
|
Dennis Wierzbicki, Photographer
|
Mike Huffstatler, Photographer, Assistant
|
Rancho Cucamonga | Ca | United States | Posted: 7:21 PM on 06.24.11 |
->> I'll agree with Dennis on this one...I would think they would be in a much better position to just license the technology. I've dug around a bit for a picture of the camera itself and can't find anything. Leads me to believe that it's likely not in what would consider "consumer friendly" packaging. If this really is deliverable technology, Lytro could stand to make a pretty nice paycheck in the license or selling of the technology.
The other place that I think could have interesting application would be with military and/or intelligence agencies. Especially is it can be used in some small-ish package and records the image quickly. |
|
Israel Shirk, Photographer, Assistant
|
Boise | ID | US | Posted: 7:35 PM on 06.24.11 |
->> Derick-
I don't think that this necessarily changes the ethics of it; it just seems it would be taking down another barrier to entry, and a relatively small one at that with how well AF works on cameras from the last decade. |
|
Mark Peters, Photographer
|
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 10:35 PM on 06.24.11 |
| ->> I'm not a tech type, but if I'm reading this correctly, it is more like the camera takes multiple images (one with each microlens) within one file - and you are basically selecting which one you want. |
|
Israel Shirk, Photographer, Assistant
|
Boise | ID | US | Posted: 12:44 AM on 06.25.11 |
->> Mark-
That's pretty close; it's just taking one image though. The difference is that instead of just recording R, G, and B for each pixel, it records different R, G, and B values along with the angle that that little bit of light is coming from. Using that, it can calculate the other regions that around in the plane of focus that the lens was set to.
It's also possible to use that data to construct a true 3-d model of everything visible in the frame, which to me seems a lot cooler. I'm sure there are some three-letter agencies using things like that for surveillance - like from the movie Enemy of The State. |
|
Alan Look, Photographer
|
Bloomington/Normal | IL | United States | Posted: 8:24 AM on 06.26.11 |
| ->> They are thinking backwards for pros. If they develop a camera that will blur the backgrounds (especially those annoying ad banners) the pro event market would rejoice. |
|
Phil Hawkins, Photographer
|
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 12:49 PM on 10.20.11 |
->> It's ready... https://www.lytro.com/camera
Who wants to take odds on these popping up on the sidelines very soon? The GWCs will jump on this big time I'm guessing. |
|
Joshua Brown, Photographer
|
Raeford | NC | USA | Posted: 4:16 PM on 10.20.11 |
| ->> I've got to say the fact that flash memory is built in keeps it from being to useful for a lot of things. Being limited on the number of shots you can take before having to connect your camera to computer via USB cord also makes on-location shooting much more difficult. That said, while the technology may be amazing, the camera itself is not meant for the pro-realm. If the promises hold true however, it will make the snapshots of my ever-moving two and half year old easier. |
|
Stanley Leary, Photographer
|
Roswell | GA | USA | Posted: 4:30 PM on 10.20.11 |
->> Just imagine pointing and shooting and it is always in focus. I hate the think of all the posts that we will miss in the future on back focusing or not focusing at all.
Now if they can get the frame rate up and zoom lens--I will buy one.
Might buy this one any way. |
|
Ben Mackey, Photographer
|
Columbia | MD | USA | Posted: 5:38 PM on 10.20.11 |
->> Fascinating.
Looking through the samples on their web site, some are jaw dropping (see one with the Empire State building behind a rain drop covered window), some look like a press release for a 3D movie (find the guy with the spear pointing at the camera), and some just don't look sharp anywhere in the frame.
It will be interesting to see how well it performs in low light situations. My guess is that you need a tripod and decent light to really make it shine but we won't know until 2012.
And now we have to learn a new term regarding a camera's resolution: "11 Megarays: the number of light rays captured by the light field sensor." Thom Hogan analyzed possible resolutions earlier this year. (See http://bythom.com/2011%20Nikon%20News.htm then search on lytro)
Joshua - 350 or 700 shots before downloading isn't enough for you? :-) And to think a brick of film used to be a lot.
The Washington Post is saying the company tells them the battery will be good for around 400 shots or so per charge. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/lytros-light-field-camera...)
Stanley - they claim it comes with an 8x optical zoom. No specs that I can see about how many shots per second it can do. There aren't even specs on shutter speeds. Fixed f/2.0 aperture. |
|
Josh Peckler, Photographer
|
Kirt Winter, Photographer
|
San Diego | CA | USA | Posted: 6:22 PM on 10.20.11 |
->> Its interesting, but if you look at the limited number of samples they have, few involve fast motion and/or low light situations. The photos are certainly interesting to look at, but if anything I'd think using it to construct an extremely large DOF image with an f/2.0 lens (which is what the camera has, according to the website) would have applications somewhere. So other than the curiosity factor, what exactly does this do for me as a sports photographer, or really, as a consumer photographer?
So in the end, I have my doubts that it's actually a breakthrough that will make any difference in the real world. |
|
Joshua Brown, Photographer
|
Raeford | NC | USA | Posted: 9:40 PM on 10.20.11 |
| ->> Ben - I'm not saying that 350-750 shots isn't enough most of the time, but if I'm shooting an event - wedding, sports etc where there is some down time to dump the images, I don't want my camera out of commission until the memory is empty. |
|
Christian Hafer, Photographer
|
Wayne | Pa | USA | Posted: 10:15 AM on 10.21.11 |
| ->> All I know is baby photographers are going to get alot better! |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|