Barrons: The Future of the Camera

[Dirk]

Interesting article. I have not followed the Foveon sensor, so don't know how accurate his description of its performance is. But the main thrust of the article, that of software becoming the decisive element in "photography" is interesting, if slightly disturbing.

http://www.barrons.com/articles/the...-who-wins-who-loses-1474052869?mod=BOL_hp_mag

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hmmmm.... It reads like the usual "tech geek writing about photography", which is probably as much use as a photographer writing about computers or a painter writing about architecture. Or possibly a vegetarian writing about charcuterie. Yes, software will become more and more important, but there's a lot more to it than that: optics, pixel size, amplifiers...

Cheers,

R.

 

[Pioneer]

It also reads like a promotion article for the purveyors of these high tech marvels, that will be forgotten in a year or two.

Tech stocks, especially speculative tech stocks, are very big stuff so Barrons and their like try to maintain the hype that keeps these companies afloat. CEVA, just one of the companies hyped in this article of being the future of the photographic world is bleeding money as fast as they can inspire speculators to give it to them. For the first 6 months of this year they lost 65 million.

Even Apple, the best of the entire bunch discussed in that article, is not as healthy as they would want you to believe. They have reported lower earnings and lower profits for all 3 quarters so far in 2016 as compared to 2015. And they recently announced that they likely would not meet their guidance numbers for the year.

And we are fully aware of Canon and Nikon's issues with declining sales.

And on this the future of photography hinges??

I don't think so.

 

[majid]

Interesting article. I have not followed the Foveon sensor, so don't know how accurate his description of its performance is.

It is. Medium format image quality in an APS sensor for the DP Merrill line. Even the first generation SD14 circa 2006 easily matched the contemporary full-frame Canon 1DsII. The matched prime optics help.

It is also true they are unusably noisy above ISO 400, are abysmally slow and unresponsive, and since you have to use Sigma's horrendous software, the workflow is an exercise in masochism. For all practical purposes, they handle like studio large-format cameras.

But the main thrust of the article, that of software becoming the decisive element in "photography" is interesting, if slightly disturbing.

He was referring to multi-sensor processing like Lytro or Light.co, but software has been a decisive element from optical aberration correction to Bayer interpolation, color correction, noise removal and so on. Even in the era of film, minilabs would use software to correct exposure.

Hmmmm.... It reads like the usual "tech geek writing about photography", which is probably as much use as a photographer writing about computers

Well, a photographer, Bill Atkinson, wrote about half the code in the original Macintosh computer.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . Well, a photographer, Bill Atkinson, wrote about half the code in the original Macintosh computer.

And two musicians (Godowsky and Mannes) invented Kodachrome, which was a lot more revolutionary than anything Apple ever made. I suggest that extrapolating from either Atkinson or God and Man to a general rule about the skills of photographers and musicians is seriously stretching things.

Cheers,

R.

 

[:: Mark]

There is nothing particularly incisive or forward looking in this very "Oh look! An iPhone with a new camera!" article.

However, computational photography is an integral part of any modern digital camera or scanning system. If you have ever used focus stacking, panorama stitching, face-detection auto-focus, lens distortion/aberration corrections, "dust deletion" and similar cloning/healing, or even plain "auto adjust" in an image editor, you are using computational photography.

I think a neat example of this are the newer Olympus cameras, which combine all of the above with a synthesised high-resolution mode, which while limited in its application, gives colour and detail comparable to some medium format systems. They are essentially an evolution of a traditional camera that punches above its weight - all thanks to these techniques.

I think that it is easy to overlook the staggering level of innovation that has been put in to digital photography at every level, and which continues not just for cell phones but for all forms of imaging.

 

[Bill Clark]

anything Apple ever made.

I respectfully disagree.

This shows your age.

My son in law works in the Hollywood scene. Ever been there? Ever heard of Pixar? Steve Jobs had a little to do with that, (just like he did with the computer industry. Isn't the iPhone a computer?) when he bought it from George Lucas. It's Steve's vision of what this could do for movie making coupled with Apple computers, that changed the industry and the financial backing he provided that got it really going. When he sold it to Disney he became Disneys largest shareholder. Apple still has the mojo even with Tim Cook at the helm.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixar

Where is Kodak today? A young man working at Kodak invented the CCD camera but execs at Kodak tried burying it and blew him off.

http://www.businessinsider.com/this...odak-never-let-it-see-the-light-of-day-2015-8

Enough said. I decline to further get into it.

 

[radi(c)al_cam]

I respectfully disagree.

This shows your age.

My son in law works in the Hollywood scene. Ever been there? Ever heard of Pixar? Steve Jobs had a little to do with that, (just like he did with the computer industry. Isn't the iPhone a computer?) when he bought it from George Lucas. It's Steve's vision of what this could do for movie making coupled with Apple computers, that changed the industry and the financial backing he provided that got it really going. When he sold it to Disney he became Disneys largest shareholder. Apple still has the mojo even with Tim Cook at the helm.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixar

Where is Kodak today? A young man working at Kodak invented the CCD chip but execs at Kodak tried burying it and blew him off.

http://www.businessinsider.com/this...odak-never-let-it-see-the-light-of-day-2015-8

Enough said. I decline to further get into it.

Now I respectfully disagree.

(And, BTW: the age «argument» is completely off target; since I'm definitely younger than you, I could say: you should be careful with «ageism», you could be the next target of it!)

Let me ask, please: What have they (Pixar, Apple) done for mankind's progress?

Compared to classic photography: not much. Unless you're inclined to count «Mickey-Mouseation of society» as a progress of mankind …

 

[Roger Hicks]

I respectfully disagree.

This shows your age.

My son in law works in the Hollywood scene. Ever been there? Ever heard of Pixar? Steve Jobs had a little to do with that, (just like he did with the computer industry. Isn't the iPhone a computer?) when he bought it from George Lucas. It's Steve's vision of what this could do for movie making coupled with Apple computers, that changed the industry and the financial backing he provided that got it really going. When he sold it to Disney he became Disneys largest shareholder. Apple still has the mojo even with Tim Cook at the helm.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixar

Where is Kodak today? A young man working at Kodak invented the CCD camera but execs at Kodak tried burying it and blew him off.

http://www.businessinsider.com/this...odak-never-let-it-see-the-light-of-day-2015-8

Enough said. I decline to further get into it.

Dear Bill,

Compared with Kodachrome?

Nah, sorry.

Conflating Pixar and Apple? Again, pushing your luck.

And incidentally, yes, I used to live in California; I have/have had a few friends in "the business"; and I've actually met Steve Sasson.

Cheers

 

[cz23]

He's right about software. The world runs on it. It's cheaper and can easily be modified and upgraded. Software lens correction are now routine. And look at the eagerness with which photographers anticipate new firmware. We all use software routinely to overcome the limitations of our digital hardware. Like it or not, software will assume an ever increasing role in digital photography.

John

 

[Dirk]

I wouldn't mind a iPhone 7+ camera/lens/software combination in an ergonomically shaped camera body that would be pocketable, yet fun to use. The slippery and awkward smartphone form factor doesn't work for me.

 

[lawrence]

The slippery and awkward smartphone form factor doesn't work for me.

Me neither, however I was obliged to get one a few months back as my other half insisted that she could no longer communicate with me unless I started using Whatapp 🙁 IMHO as a picture-taking device it leaves a lot to be desired not least the 'slippery awkwardness' you mention.

 

[nikonhswebmaster]

CEVA, just one of the companies hyped in this article of being the future of the photographic world is bleeding money as fast as they can inspire speculators to give it to them. For the first 6 months of this year they lost 65 million.

Do you have link for CEVA's loss?
http://csimarket.com/stocks/income.php?code=CEVA

Stock has doubled in a year.