Light field photography

[peter303]

There are some examples from Stanford online which include the raw images, and synthetic images at arbitrary points of view, DOF, and aperature:
http://lightfield.stanford.edu/lfs.html
This worked in IE but not my Firefox browser.

[Jon Frohlich]

There are some examples from Stanford online which include the raw images, and synthetic images at arbitrary points of view, DOF, and aperature:
http://lightfield.stanford.edu/lfs.html
This worked in IE but not my Firefox browser.

Not really the same thing.

http://lightfield.stanford.edu/acq.html

I don't think the Lytro version has the same capabilities as the rig they used to capture these images.

[Bean]

Bean wrote
You can set DOF in post

.

Could you tell me where you found the information? I have checked their website and blog carefully and have only found references to focus and being able to switch beween 2D and 3D. Nothing about Depth of Field. Depth of Field would be a game changer.

It's the entire point of the technology. It captures all the visible light, the DOF shown in the online images is purely a function of post-processing settings. It may or may not be available at this time but that's purely a software limitation, not hardware.

[Bean]

Not really the same thing.

http://lightfield.stanford.edu/acq.html

I don't think the Lytro version has the same capabilities as the rig they used to capture these images.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_concept" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[peter303]

http://lightfield.stanford.edu/acq.html
I don't think the Lytro version has the same capabilities as the rig they used to capture these images.

As I said in my verbose earlier post this can now be implemented in a single camera with a clever lens system.
The one I saw replaces the main lens with a grid of bead lenses.

[JayMiller]

JayMiller wrote:

Bean wrote
You can set DOF in post

.

Jay wrote: Could you tell me where you found the information? I have checked their website and blog carefully and have only found references to focus and being able to switch beween 2D and 3D. Nothing about Depth of Field. Depth of Field would be a game changer.

Bean wrote: It's the entire point of the technology. It captures all the visible light, the DOF shown in the online images is purely a function of post-processing settings. It may or may not be available at this time but that's purely a software limitation, not hardware.

It may be a problem with software (i'm not convinced of that), the fact remains that apparently you can't currently change DoF with the Lytro and the Lytro is what is under discussion.

[Jon Frohlich]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_concept" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm impressed. You found a wiki link. I'm familiar with the term.

[Bean]

I'm impressed. You found a wiki link. I'm familiar with the term.

So where's the confusion? The Lytro essentially takes the large array and puts it in a small form factor with some lens trickery.

It may be a problem with software (i'm not convinced of that), the fact remains that apparently you can't currently change DoF with the Lytro and the Lytro is what is under discussion.

Not having actually used the software, I don't think either of us are qualified to make any definitive statements about the Lytro. In doing some reading, it seems that the DOF adjustment has been demonstrated in the past by the people who are making the Lytro (in a lab setting). I doubt that such functionality would be left out of the provided software package; if it has been, that's a crying shame because no one in history has ever made a 3rd party image processing program independent of a camera manufacturer.

[Jon Frohlich]

I'm impressed. You found a wiki link. I'm familiar with the term.

So where's the confusion? The Lytro essentially takes the large array and puts it in a small form factor with some lens trickery.

There's no confusion. I'm criticizing the product they are selling commercially. They aren't marketing this as a POC.

[roguejackalope]

I'm impressed. You found a wiki link. I'm familiar with the term.

So where's the confusion? The Lytro essentially takes the large array and puts it in a small form factor with some lens trickery.

There's no confusion. I'm criticizing the product they are selling commercially. They aren't marketing this as a POC.

No, they're not. But it's just version 1.0.

It's a cool technology, and it's pretty exciting to imagine what it could mean for the future of photography. Thanks for sharing.

[Bean]

There's no confusion. I'm criticizing the product they are selling commercially. They aren't marketing this as a POC.

Can you be specific about what feature or lack thereof you're criticizing?

Edit: I just went and played with the Stanford samples a bit more and I'm making a guess (which could be wrong - let me know if it is) that your criticism is an inability to perform a parallax shift. This gif was made from a single shot from a Lytro. It appears to not be a feature currently supported in the software, but it demonstrates that the hardware is capable.

[Jon Frohlich]

There's no confusion. I'm criticizing the product they are selling commercially. They aren't marketing this as a POC.

Can you be specific about what feature or lack thereof you're criticizing?

1) Terrible form factor and ergonomic design
2) Touchscreen only and tiny LCD (I personally hate this in a camera)
3) As far as I can tell little in the way of shutter speed control or manual control of any kind (no mention of max/min shutter speeds at all)
4) No ability to expand memory (no SD card slot)
5) No flash
6) No mention of metering modes and how it exposes a scene
7) No mention of what they mean by HD quality but if the examples are any indication your resulting image is very low-res

I could go on and on.