Re: Anyone else see this article from PC World?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by philo, Jun 27, 2011.

  1. philo

    philo Guest

    philo, Jun 27, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In message <iub0bl$674$>, philo <>
    writes
    >On 06/27/2011 09:37 AM, Allen wrote:
    >> Interesting--but at what cost of resources?
    >>
    >>
    >>http://www.pcworld.com/article/230867/camera_startup_lytro_promises_to_
    >>revolutionize_photography.html#tk.nl_wbx_h_crawl1
    >>
    >>
    >> or Tinyurl:
    >>
    >> http://preview.tinyurl.com/3o6t33t
    >>
    >> Allen

    >
    >
    >
    >I saw that
    >and posted the info on alt.photography
    >
    >
    >there were a few skeptics there...but personally I find it rather amazing.
    >
    >
    >If it comes out at an affordable price and the reviews are good...
    >I'd consider getting one


    I share the suspicion that raw images are going to be memory hogs. The
    system would, I think, eliminate autofocus lag, at the cost of greater
    time spent processing the image after exposure.

    It seems to me that it moves the cost of the system from the glass to
    the sensor (and the processor).

    However, while the PC World article talks about refocusing the image,
    one of the applications described in the associated Ph.D. thesis is an
    extended depth of field. While I see why this might not be desired in,
    for example, portrait shots, it would come in handy for closeups of
    flowers and insects, especially if wanted for technical illustration,
    rather than artistic purposes.

    Something else that I wonder whether this can supply - one can sort of
    get away with photographing through fences when the fences are greatly
    out of focus - but could this throw away the light from the fence so you
    have a photograph which is if the fence wasn't there?
    --
    Stewart Robert Hinsley
    Stewart Robert Hinsley, Jun 29, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. philo

    Martin Brown Guest

    On 29/06/2011 18:16, Paul Furman wrote:
    > Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:
    >> philo writes
    >>> Allen wrote:
    >>>> Interesting--but at what cost of resources?
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.pcworld.com/article/2308...lutionize_photography.html#tk.nl_wbx_h_crawl1
    >>>>
    >>>> or Tinyurl:
    >>>>
    >>>> http://preview.tinyurl.com/3o6t33t
    >>>
    >>> I saw that and posted the info on alt.photography

    >
    > Ah, I didn't click to the article though, very interesting.
    >
    >>> there were a few skeptics there...but personally I find it rather
    >>> amazing.
    >>>
    >>> If it comes out at an affordable price and the reviews are good...
    >>> I'd consider getting one

    >>
    >> I share the suspicion that raw images are going to be memory hogs. The
    >> system would, I think, eliminate autofocus lag, at the cost of greater
    >> time spent processing the image after exposure.
    >>
    >> It seems to me that it moves the cost of the system from the glass to
    >> the sensor (and the processor).
    >>
    >> However, while the PC World article talks about refocusing the image,
    >> one of the applications described in the associated Ph.D. thesis is an
    >> extended depth of field. While I see why this might not be desired in,
    >> for example, portrait shots, it would come in handy for closeups of
    >> flowers and insects, especially if wanted for technical illustration,
    >> rather than artistic purposes.
    >>
    >> Something else that I wonder whether this can supply - one can sort of
    >> get away with photographing through fences when the fences are greatly
    >> out of focus - but could this throw away the light from the fence so you
    >> have a photograph which is if the fence wasn't there?

    >
    > Extended DOF may or may not be unique, you can always stop down and
    > generally pay a price with diffraction, a longer exposure and/or more
    > noise but the selective focus is very interesting. Perhaps the design
    > solves the light loss associated with stopping down too but I doubt that.


    That is in a real sense exactly what it solves. The coded mask trick
    allows you make a pseudo "pinhole" that lets a lot more light through.
    The price is a lot of computation to get from the raw data to a usable
    image. And introduction to the basics is online at:

    http://www.paulcarlisle.net/old/codedaperture.html

    I don't know what family of MURA Lytron are using.

    Regards,
    Martin Brown
    Martin Brown, Jun 29, 2011
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. md
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    731
  2. Kirk Davison

    see Jodi everyone else likes them

    Kirk Davison, Dec 18, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    351
    Larry Lynch
    Dec 20, 2003
  3. Alan Browne

    Anti shake article at Minolta World

    Alan Browne, Jul 8, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    521
    Frank Pittel
    Jul 14, 2004
  4. BradReeseCom
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    375
    BradReeseCom
    Oct 30, 2006
  5. samg
    Replies:
    26
    Views:
    850
Loading...

Share This Page