Imagine if this was applied to space telescopes... Or do they already have such things?
Inb4 people think their camera is faulty and doesn't focus.
What's the resolution? VGA?
They showed off something similar for Photoshop recently.
More info:
[url]http://www.pcworld.com/article/242217/lytro_cameras_on_sale_now_what_you_need_to_know.html[/url]
[QUOTE=Akasori;32873303]More info:
[url]http://www.pcworld.com/article/242217/lytro_cameras_on_sale_now_what_you_need_to_know.html[/url][/QUOTE]
Go here,
read this.
[quote]At launch, Lytro devices are only compatible with a Mac computer running OS X 10.6 or higher, but Lytro is promising a Windows client in 2012. It's not clear if the Windows client will be finished in time for the first shipment of Lytro devices in early 2012.[/quote]
Not happy.
[QUOTE=y0haN;32873160]They showed off something similar for Photoshop recently.[/QUOTE]
Not at all. They showed off an advanced de-blurring filter which removes blur based on camera movement at the time of the photo, which is much different to being able to focus during post processing.
[QUOTE=ironman17;32872571]Imagine if this was applied to space telescopes... Or do they already have such things?[/QUOTE]
Why would that matter? Telescopes priority is resolution and light gathering. Hence the massive mirrors.
Hopefully I'll see some of these at the London technology expo this weekend.
[QUOTE=ironman17;32872571]Imagine if this was applied to space telescopes... Or do they already have such things?[/QUOTE]
i'm pretty sure they're all set to infinite distance
Man, professional photography is really taking a hit with all this new "do it for you" technology.
It's sort of like how tracing is to sketching. It just doesn't take skill anymore.
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;32873965]Man, professional photography is really taking a hit with all this new "do it for you" technology.
It's sort of like how tracing is to sketching. It just doesn't take skill anymore.[/QUOTE]
Because the ability to refocus a picture affects the composition, tone and subject matter.
All the gadgets in the world can't help you take a decent photo.
I dunno what resolution it shoots, but for 400 dollar it's not too pricy.
It's perfect for low light photography.
[QUOTE=scotland1;32874013]Because the ability to refocus a picture affects the composition, tone and subject matter.
All the gadgets in the world can't help you take a decent photo.[/QUOTE]
I beg to differ, that is an outrageous thing to say.
All the technology in the world CAN make a person who doesn't have a lot of experience takign a photo, take a decent photo.
With advanced focusing and shutter revolution, most dslrs these days come standard with a shoot and forget feature.
Sure a professional can take a much better photo using his own personal style by manipulating the settings, but a person who has never picked up a camera before can easily buy an expensive dslr these days and produce professional grade photo material.
What a completely odd thing to say.
edit: Furthermore, this new post-shot focusing, makes it even easier to catch a photo and then doctor the focus to exactly how you want it afterwards. This makes taking a picture of a moving object require literally no skill at all.
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;32874169]I beg to differ, that is an outrageous thing to say.
All the technology in the world CAN make a person who doesn't have a lot of experience takign a photo, take a decent photo.
With advanced focusing and shutter revolution, most dslrs these days come standard with a shoot and forget feature.
Sure a professional can take a much better photo using his own personal style by manipulating the settings, but a person who has never picked up a camera before can easily buy an expensive dslr these days and produce professional grade photo material.
What a completely odd thing to say.
edit: Furthermore, this new post-shot focusing, makes it even easier to catch a photo and then doctor the focus to exactly how you want it afterwards. This makes taking a picture of a moving object require literally no skill at all.[/QUOTE]
Good photography isn't how good your picture looks filter-wise, it's the subject of the picture.
Exactly.
[QUOTE=Yogurt;32874304]Good photography isn't how good your picture looks filter-wise, it's the subject of the picture.[/QUOTE]
Subject meaning art.
Art is subjective.
I could take a picture of a brick wall and someone could call it art and buy it for 30 thousand dollars.
Thats the great thing about art. It can be anything, because it is all in the eye of the beholder.
Filters and tech only enhance the feeling the content of the picture evokes.
Every picture evokes some feeling in a person, whether you want to call it art or not.
[QUOTE=DiBBs27;32874169]I beg to differ, that is an outrageous thing to say.
All the technology in the world CAN make a person who doesn't have a lot of experience takign a photo, take a decent photo.
With advanced focusing and shutter revolution, most dslrs these days come standard with a shoot and forget feature.
Sure a professional can take a much better photo using his own personal style by manipulating the settings, but a person who has never picked up a camera before can easily buy an expensive dslr these days and produce professional grade photo material.
What a completely odd thing to say.
edit: Furthermore, this new post-shot focusing, makes it even easier to catch a photo and then doctor the focus to exactly how you want it afterwards. This makes taking a picture of a moving object require literally no skill at all.[/QUOTE]
For me as a [I]average Joe[/I] that's only a good thing.
I'm tired of dicking with settings and have to take multiple photos just to get one somewhat decent photo.
Though I [B]DO[/B] respect those who go all manual with the settings.
[QUOTE=Van-man;32874395]For me as a [I]average Joe[/I] that's only a good thing.
I'm tired of dicking with settings and have to take multiple photos just to get one somewhat decent photo.
Though I [B]DO[/B] respect those who go all manual with the settings.[/QUOTE]
I agree. I'm only basing my opinion of this tech from an artists point of view. That where my argument stands.
For the average person who just wants to take a photo once and not go through the hassle of taking multiples, or having to edit it on the computer, it's a welcome feature.
I refuse to believe this.
That is awesome and quite understandable after you've watched the video in that article.
[QUOTE=y0haN;32873160]They showed off something similar for Photoshop recently.[/QUOTE]
Why 4 disgrees and 2 dumbs? A few months ago they DID show off a feature like this for photoshop where one could re-focus a photo taken with a special camera that basically mashed together like 50 slightly different angles of the photo into one editable file.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;32874576]I refuse to believe this.[/QUOTE]
It does looks too awesome to be true, but it is.
Enchant
[QUOTE=Funny Hats;32874684]Why 4 disgrees and 2 dumbs? A few months ago they DID show off a feature like this for photoshop where one could re-focus a photo taken with a special camera that basically mashed together like 50 slightly different angles of the photo into one editable file.[/QUOTE]
For some reason people throw around dumbs around here just because they disagree. Odd because theres already a disagree button..
And yes, I've seen that photoshop feature. It looks like a lot of trouble to me though. but i bet it is rather useful for those perfect shots that you've mistakenly shot a little bit out of focus.
[QUOTE=Funny Hats;32874684]Why 4 disgrees and 2 dumbs? A few months ago they DID show off a feature like this for photoshop where one could re-focus a photo taken with a special camera that basically mashed together like 50 slightly different angles of the photo into one editable file.[/QUOTE]
It's because they disagree with him. That photoshop feature is an artificial effect, this is real.
[editline]20th October 2011[/editline]
More info.
[url]http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/19/lytro-camera-hands-on-video/[/url]
[QUOTE=Yogurt;32874304]Good photography isn't how good your picture looks filter-wise, it's the subject of the picture.[/QUOTE]
Just confirms that anyone can take a good photo. There are only few things you need to know before you can have a go at it with the intention of making good photos.
[editline]20th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Funny Hats;32874684]Why 4 disgrees and 2 dumbs? A few months ago they DID show off a feature like this for photoshop where one could re-focus a photo taken with a special camera that basically mashed together like 50 slightly different angles of the photo into one editable file.[/QUOTE]
There's a difference in function.
One allows you to chance the focus after the picture is taken while the other corrects flaws in the photo caused by movement of the camera while the shutter was open.
Simply put, if you use this camera you won't always get sharp images. If you use this camera and then photoshop, you never will have to worry again.
Fuck misrated.
But seriously, just because you had to do it by hand before doesn't mean it was a vital artistic skill. Removing the technical limitations means you can focus on the art.
I can only imagine the amount of wanky "arty" photos that will clutter my facebook news feed if this becomes a big thing.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.