Lytro Camera
-
It's not sanctioned until *I* notice it. :)
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997If *I* can remember it, it must have been here!
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/lytro-camera-a-game-changer-in-world-of-photography/2012/02/29/gIQAX1itiR_story.html[^]
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997Cool. A new way to shoot people! Marc
My Blog
The Relationship Oriented Programming IDE
Melody's Amazon Herb Site -
Cool. A new way to shoot people! Marc
My Blog
The Relationship Oriented Programming IDE
Melody's Amazon Herb SiteJohn already knows too many ways to shoot people...
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
-
Cool. A new way to shoot people! Marc
My Blog
The Relationship Oriented Programming IDE
Melody's Amazon Herb Siteshoot first, aim later ? it's the modern version of spray and pray.
Watched code never compiles.
-
Looks like a new way to take photos is on the horizon but with any new technology there are problems, 1 mega pixel, needs good conditions to shoot, etc. but definitely an exciting prospect.
Exactly, the premise is good, the camera can detect not only the color and the amount of light hitting the sensor, but also the direction it's coming from (the differentiating feature that makes it all possible). However, it is only 1 megapixel which is less than 1280x1024 actual resolution, it has awkward styling, and it is still P&S camera with slow shutter speeds, no real viewfinder, etc... The good news however is that if the technology matures all of these features (that probably amount to a special sensor) can be migrated to regular cameras or even DSLR's. Although it does make me wonder if having an array of different interchangeable lenses is going to be as important in the future as it is right now... If you can change aperture after the picture is taken, and you're not shooting in low light, would you really need that ultra fast 1.4f lens to get that nice brokeh?
-
Cool. A new way to shoot people! Marc
My Blog
The Relationship Oriented Programming IDE
Melody's Amazon Herb SiteMarc Clifton wrote:
Cool. A new way to shoot people!
If only that were true...Can't live with em can't shoot em takes on a whole new meaning. :)
-
Exactly, the premise is good, the camera can detect not only the color and the amount of light hitting the sensor, but also the direction it's coming from (the differentiating feature that makes it all possible). However, it is only 1 megapixel which is less than 1280x1024 actual resolution, it has awkward styling, and it is still P&S camera with slow shutter speeds, no real viewfinder, etc... The good news however is that if the technology matures all of these features (that probably amount to a special sensor) can be migrated to regular cameras or even DSLR's. Although it does make me wonder if having an array of different interchangeable lenses is going to be as important in the future as it is right now... If you can change aperture after the picture is taken, and you're not shooting in low light, would you really need that ultra fast 1.4f lens to get that nice brokeh?
Right I think lenses per se will be a thing of the past but they've got a long way to go before current DSLR's are to be replaced.
-
Right I think lenses per se will be a thing of the past but they've got a long way to go before current DSLR's are to be replaced.
Hm... It is a difficult question about lenses. I'm not so sure that interhangeable lenses are going to go away, even if lytro technology succeeds. Why do people need interchangeable lenses? 1. Different focal ranges - ultra wide, zoom, and specialty like macro 2. Better glass quality, better quality photos 3. Fast lens is better in low light 4. Fast lenses (f2.8 or faster) lets you have a nice bokeh Now, I can see lytro technology eliminating the need for bullet point 4, i.e. you won't need a fast lens to have a nice bokeh, since it can be manipulated in software and in theory it will be identical to what you'd get with hardware. However, I do not see lytro technology making the rest of the benefits obsolete, you would still need a specialty lens to take macro photos, you would still need a fast lens to take low light photos, and you'd still get benefit of having better glass on your body. So I don't think it's as clear and cut as saying they are going to go away. Lenses will still exist, at least for the foreseeable future, but what exactly happens is still a mystery. Are we going to see less lens offerings? Less new models? Would this technology require completely new lenses? Would we even need a focus ring on new lenses? Would we need an aperture setting on our cameras? Are lenses going to be come a niche product used by professionals only? Those are all questions that I don't think anybody can answer yet.
-
Hm... It is a difficult question about lenses. I'm not so sure that interhangeable lenses are going to go away, even if lytro technology succeeds. Why do people need interchangeable lenses? 1. Different focal ranges - ultra wide, zoom, and specialty like macro 2. Better glass quality, better quality photos 3. Fast lens is better in low light 4. Fast lenses (f2.8 or faster) lets you have a nice bokeh Now, I can see lytro technology eliminating the need for bullet point 4, i.e. you won't need a fast lens to have a nice bokeh, since it can be manipulated in software and in theory it will be identical to what you'd get with hardware. However, I do not see lytro technology making the rest of the benefits obsolete, you would still need a specialty lens to take macro photos, you would still need a fast lens to take low light photos, and you'd still get benefit of having better glass on your body. So I don't think it's as clear and cut as saying they are going to go away. Lenses will still exist, at least for the foreseeable future, but what exactly happens is still a mystery. Are we going to see less lens offerings? Less new models? Would this technology require completely new lenses? Would we even need a focus ring on new lenses? Would we need an aperture setting on our cameras? Are lenses going to be come a niche product used by professionals only? Those are all questions that I don't think anybody can answer yet.
It's all speculative at this point but it is an exciting to see a technology leap in photography. Bout time.
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/lytro-camera-a-game-changer-in-world-of-photography/2012/02/29/gIQAX1itiR_story.html[^]
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997When an article about this was posted here last June[^], I wondered if we'd ever see the day when the product actually became available. It seems they've managed to bring it to market, at last. Very cool! I've been very leery of vaporware since, way back when, Motorola announced the 68000 cpu, amid much flashy advertising, WESCON booth bimbos, and loud front page articles in Electronics and Electronics Design magazines. I came, I saw, I lusted, and I wasted lots of time designing a motherboard for the beast. But it was years before they actually built one. All the hoopla was intended to drown out the far superior National Semiconductor NS32000 cpu, which was actually being produced. It worked, too, since the 32000 quietly slipped off the radar soon after.
Will Rogers never met me.