Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Amazed at news penetration of that infinite focus camera the Lytro

Reply
Thread Tools

Amazed at news penetration of that infinite focus camera the Lytro

 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2011
Did they pay journalists to spread this story far and wide? Sure
looks like it. It's been everywhere.

http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2011/1...available.html
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2011
"RichA" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Did they pay journalists to spread this story far and wide? Sure
> looks like it. It's been everywhere.
>
> http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2011/1...available.html


It's not a DSLR, though.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Me
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2011
On 25/10/2011 2:39 a.m., RichA wrote:
> Did they pay journalists to spread this story far and wide? Sure
> looks like it. It's been everywhere.
>
> http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2011/1...available.html


Did they pay you to spread it too?
It is actually pretty interesting (IMO), so reasonably newsworthy.
Sample pictures here:
https://www.lytro.com/living-pictures/282
click on image to set focus point, double click to zoom... slightly.
So native "still" output resolution is about 0.3 mp, from an 11
"mega-ray" sensor.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Me
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2011
On 25/10/2011 2:32 p.m., Rich wrote:
> Me<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:j84iip$ssl$(E-Mail Removed):
>
>> On 25/10/2011 2:39 a.m., RichA wrote:
>>> Did they pay journalists to spread this story far and wide? Sure
>>> looks like it. It's been everywhere.
>>>
>>> http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2011/1...camera-now-ava
>>> ilable.html

>>
>> Did they pay you to spread it too?
>> It is actually pretty interesting (IMO), so reasonably newsworthy.
>> Sample pictures here:
>> https://www.lytro.com/living-pictures/282
>> click on image to set focus point, double click to zoom... slightly.
>> So native "still" output resolution is about 0.3 mp, from an 11
>> "mega-ray" sensor.
>>
>>
>>

>
> I wondering if you can't get a similar result using a hyper-small 0.3mp
> sensor?

No you can't. Despite you posting the link, I don't think you "get it".
"Infinite Focus" is a poor description.
This allows relatively shallow DOF, where you can select focus distance
/after/ the shot has been taken, retaining shallow DOF if desired,
rather than making everything in focus, as in deep DOF from a small
sensor and small F-stop. Sure you could use it to output very deep DOF,
but what's the point when your iPhone does a better job?
Did you look at the examples in the link I posted?
If it's possible that this concept can be scaled up so that it gives
reasonable output resolution, then it would be pretty nifty. Completely
getting rid of the need to focus HD video (as you can select the focus
point later), yet retaining shallow DOF (or deep - you could get to
choose when editing) would be quite a trick. Of course it can also
output 3d.
 
Reply With Quote
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2011
On Oct 24, 11:48*pm, Me <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 25/10/2011 2:32 p.m., Rich wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Me<(E-Mail Removed)> *wrote innews:j84iip$ssl$(E-Mail Removed):

>
> >> On 25/10/2011 2:39 a.m., RichA wrote:
> >>> Did they pay journalists to spread this story far and wide? *Sure
> >>> looks like it. *It's been everywhere.

>
> >>>http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2011/1...camera-now-ava
> >>> ilable.html

>
> >> Did they pay you to spread it too?
> >> It is actually pretty interesting (IMO), so reasonably newsworthy.
> >> Sample pictures here:
> >>https://www.lytro.com/living-pictures/282
> >> click on image to set focus point, double click to zoom... slightly.
> >> So native "still" output resolution is about 0.3 mp, from an 11
> >> "mega-ray" sensor.

>
> > I wondering if you can't get a similar result using a hyper-small 0.3mp
> > sensor?

>
> No you can't. *Despite you posting the link, I don't think you "get it"..
> "Infinite Focus" is a poor description.
> This allows relatively shallow DOF, where you can select focus distance
> /after/ the shot has been taken, retaining shallow DOF if desired,
> rather than making everything in focus, as in deep DOF from a small
> sensor and small F-stop. *Sure you could use it to output very deep DOF,
> but what's the point when your iPhone does a better job?
> Did you look at the examples in the link I posted?
> If it's possible that this concept can be scaled up so that it gives
> reasonable output resolution, then it would be pretty nifty. Completely
> getting rid of the need to focus HD video (as you can select the focus
> point later), yet retaining shallow DOF (or deep - you could get to
> choose when editing) would be quite a trick. *Of course it can also
> output 3d.


The articles so far are woefully lacking in specifics. Like how does
it work, why does the "sensor" have such a low effective pixel count
(and near worthless resolution at this point) and how long does it
take to acquire each shot, what is sensitivity like?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Me
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2011
On 26/10/2011 2:37 a.m., RichA wrote:
> On Oct 24, 11:48 pm, Me<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> On 25/10/2011 2:32 p.m., Rich wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Me<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote innews:j84iip$ssl$(E-Mail Removed):

>>
>>>> On 25/10/2011 2:39 a.m., RichA wrote:
>>>>> Did they pay journalists to spread this story far and wide? Sure
>>>>> looks like it. It's been everywhere.

>>
>>>>> http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2011/1...camera-now-ava
>>>>> ilable.html

>>
>>>> Did they pay you to spread it too?
>>>> It is actually pretty interesting (IMO), so reasonably newsworthy.
>>>> Sample pictures here:
>>>> https://www.lytro.com/living-pictures/282
>>>> click on image to set focus point, double click to zoom... slightly.
>>>> So native "still" output resolution is about 0.3 mp, from an 11
>>>> "mega-ray" sensor.

>>
>>> I wondering if you can't get a similar result using a hyper-small 0.3mp
>>> sensor?

>>
>> No you can't. Despite you posting the link, I don't think you "get it".
>> "Infinite Focus" is a poor description.
>> This allows relatively shallow DOF, where you can select focus distance
>> /after/ the shot has been taken, retaining shallow DOF if desired,
>> rather than making everything in focus, as in deep DOF from a small
>> sensor and small F-stop. Sure you could use it to output very deep DOF,
>> but what's the point when your iPhone does a better job?
>> Did you look at the examples in the link I posted?
>> If it's possible that this concept can be scaled up so that it gives
>> reasonable output resolution, then it would be pretty nifty. Completely
>> getting rid of the need to focus HD video (as you can select the focus
>> point later), yet retaining shallow DOF (or deep - you could get to
>> choose when editing) would be quite a trick. Of course it can also
>> output 3d.

>
> The articles so far are woefully lacking in specifics. Like how does
> it work, why does the "sensor" have such a low effective pixel count
> (and near worthless resolution at this point) and how long does it
> take to acquire each shot, what is sensitivity like?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-field_photography

Time to acquire each shot is a claimed advantage - as it doesn't need to
focus, then there's no focus lag. Sensitivity will depend on the sensor
sensitivity, but there's also a potential advantage, as deep DOF can be
achieved (if desired) at large aperture settings.
The resolution isn't very good. The first digital camera I bought (in
the '90s) was also a toy, with about the same output resolution as the
Lytro. Only a few years later, consumers could buy cheap digital
cameras (at about the same US$200 as I paid for a toy) with plenty of
resolution.
I'm not going to rush out and buy a Lytro camera, but the technology is
very interesting - I'd even say revolutionary - especially if resolution
can be improved while also keeping size and price under control.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Ryan McGinnis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-26-2011
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, RichA wrote:

> Did they pay journalists to spread this story far and wide? Sure
> looks like it. It's been everywhere.
>
> http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2011/1...available.html


It's a camera that seems to do "magic". Mostly because it's utilizing one
of the largest advances in camera technology since the invention of the
digital camera. In some sense, it's not even a "camera" any more, as it
is capturing the image in a way that is fundementally different than all
cameras before it.


-Ryan McGinnis
The BIG Storm Picture: http://bigstormpicture.com PGP Key 0x65115E4C
Follow my storm chasing adventures at http://bigstormpicture.blogspot.com
Images@Getty: http://bit.ly/oDW1pT Images@Alamy:<a href="http://bit.ly"...p://bit.ly</a>/aMH6Qd
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ryan McGinnis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-26-2011
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, RichA wrote:

> The articles so far are woefully lacking in specifics. Like how does
> it work, why does the "sensor" have such a low effective pixel count
> (and near worthless resolution at this point) and how long does it
> take to acquire each shot, what is sensitivity like?


https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikiped...enoptic_camera

-Ryan McGinnis
The BIG Storm Picture: http://bigstormpicture.com PGP Key 0x65115E4C
Follow my storm chasing adventures at http://bigstormpicture.blogspot.com
Images@Getty: http://bit.ly/oDW1pT Images@Alamy:<a href="http://bit.ly"...p://bit.ly</a>/aMH6Qd
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-27-2011
Ryan McGinnis <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, RichA wrote:
>
>> Did they pay journalists to spread this story far and wide? Sure
>> looks like it. It's been everywhere.
>>
>> http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2011/1...available.html

>
>It's a camera that seems to do "magic". Mostly because it's utilizing one
>of the largest advances in camera technology since the invention of the
>digital camera. In some sense, it's not even a "camera" any more, as it
>is capturing the image in a way that is fundementally different than all
>cameras before it.




<Yawn>

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ryan McGinnis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-27-2011
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011, Bruce wrote:

> <Yawn>


http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/3/19/

-Ryan
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
problem in running a basic code in python 3.3.0 that includes HTML file Satabdi Mukherjee Python 1 04-04-2013 07:48 PM
Lytro Camera Eric Miller Digital Photography 2 08-08-2011 08:46 PM
Amazed at the boneheaded response! rgoya Javascript 3 05-06-2004 04:08 PM
I'm amazed of the intense inefficiency of Soap Error messages!... Vince C. ASP General 2 01-14-2004 01:25 PM
I am still amazed at 1600 ISO :) Hugo Drax Digital Photography 44 01-02-2004 07:17 PM



Advertisments