OT: Kodak Focuses on Sifting Pix

bmattock

Veteran
Local time
3:09 AM
Joined
Jul 29, 2003
Messages
10,654
Location
Detroit Area
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,70740-0.html?tw=wn_index_7

Pure Kodakery here - real magic if any of it works. I'm digging this. Wasn't someone just asking about how to database their photos just the other day?

I hope this stuff actually works - if it does, it shows Kodak is 'getting it' when it comes to making the transition. One of the biggest questions when one stores their digital photos and their scanned negs / slides / photos is : how do we find it again? Even if this ends up not working, I'd file it in the 'noble effort' department.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

Kodak Focuses on Sifting Pix

By Seán Captain
02:00 AM Apr, 26, 2006

NEW YORK -- Eastman Kodak showed off new technology Tuesday designed to help shutterbugs deal with mountains of images accumulating in their photo archives and on their hard drives.

New hardware and software still in development digitizes old snapshots and extracts information from photos in order to automatically organize them. Kodak declined to say when these technologies will show up in products, although the interfaces appeared rather polished during Tuesday's press conference, which marked the fifth birthday of the company's EasyShare docking digital camera.

The first new technology, currently nicknamed "Scan the World," is designed to digitize old photos quickly and easily.

Kodak modified its check-scanning machines -- used to process bank deposits by the dozen -- into omnivorous scanners that can process a stack of photos in a variety of shapes and sizes. The giant scanners are not intended for consumer sale but will likely show up in kiosks or behind the photo counters of drug stores, said Randy Fredlund, a Kodak representative who demonstrated the technology.

Along with digitizing the images, the scanning software also assigns each image a tag based on the decade in which the photo likely was taken.

How does the software figure that out? Photographic paper styles have changed over the years, and the software gauges the size and shape of a print to guess when the image was made. It further narrows down the date based on whether the print is color or black-and-white.

The scanner also reads the backs of prints and eventually should be able to pick up watermarks such as "Kodak Paper" and handwriting such as "Uncle Jimmy 1957" to help identify photos.

Kodak is also looking at the fronts of pictures, with a technology called "scene recognition." The first phase, on display Tuesday, can analyze a face in a photo and find other pictures of that person in a collection. Kodak developed this software independent of Riya, a company that already offers face-recognition software. Riya can also analyze text in photos, even reading street signs in an effort to guess where a photo was taken.

Extracting place data is still a holy grail for digital photos. A handful of cameras -- mainly professional-grade digital SLRs -- work with GPS attachments that can embed precise coordinates into a photo file. But tagging place data is still beyond the reach of consumer models.

However, Kodak cracked open a door to this capability Tuesday with its new EasyShare V610, a slim camera with dual lenses and image sensors that enable it to cover a gargantuan 10X zoom range (from 38-mm wide-angle to 380-mm telephoto) without a massive protruding lens.

The $450 V610 is Kodak's first camera to include Bluetooth wireless networking. The initial purpose is to allow photo transfers to Bluetooth-equipped computers, printers, PDAs and cell phones. But some of those phones include GPS receivers. In theory, a Bluetooth connection should allow the camera to extract location information and embed it in the photos, an idea Kodak has at least considered. "That definitely has a play," said Jens Hinrichsen, a Kodak marketing manager.

The company also updated the EasyShare-One, bumping the resolution to 6.1 megapixels and adding support for paid Wi-Fi networks like Boingo and Wayport. The camera will be out in July or August, Kodak said.
 
I can finally give Kodak a big "THAT'S what I'm talkin' about!", however tentative. This is something that can potentially work regardless of photographic medium. Impossible dreams of future PS plug-ins dance in my head...


- Barrett
 
I actually believe this will be available in our lifetime. That's why I'm saving on the Lasik surgery now, and wearing my scratched up glasses all the time (those nasty FSU viewfinders!).

When the technology comes onto the market, I'll get my eyes fixed, and request for the Panasonic / Leica Digilux ocular digital camera add-on while I'm at it.

I'll still carry on using my classic rangefinders, of course.

And maybe I'll still keep on wearing my glasses, just because.

Clarence
 
amateriat said:
I can finally give Kodak a big "THAT'S what I'm talkin' about!", however tentative. This is something that can potentially work regardless of photographic medium. Impossible dreams of future PS plug-ins dance in my head...

- Barrett

I know that people are angry at Kodak - some because they have walked away from their loyal film base so easily - others because they have squandered their early and commanding lead in digital cameras. Some are madder yet because they hired a computer-savvy CEO (Perez) who is not part of the photo 'establishment'. And I'm hip to that.

But give the devil his due - Perez has been saying for awhile now that here is finally a chance to rethink the camera. We know it takes photos - and if that's all it is - a replacing of film with a digital sensor, then it is a poor choice at the moment. But it also gives us the the chance to think about what else a box that take photos can be - both for consumers and enthusiasts alike.

Part of it is the eternal marketing-driven search for individuality - for a niche, for a specialty to make them distinct from Canon or Sony or whomever. But I think part of it is also harnessing that long-dormant streak of cussedness and out-of-the-box (if you'll forgive a bad pun) thinking that Kodak engineers used to be famous for.

Anyway, it is good to see, and if we can all pull in our horns on the d vs f thing for a moment (including me) - technology like this could bode well for all of us down the road apiece.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
clarence said:
I actually believe this will be available in our lifetime. That's why I'm saving on the Lasik surgery now, and wearing my scratched up glasses all the time (those nasty FSU viewfinders!).

When the technology comes onto the market, I'll get my eyes fixed, and request for the Panasonic / Leica Digilux ocular digital camera add-on while I'm at it.

I'll still carry on using my classic rangefinders, of course.

And maybe I'll still keep on wearing my glasses, just because.

Clarence

I want Zeiss eyeballs.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Whatever you do, just don't go for the KMZ Jupiter or Industar implants. They say the glass is good, but might not be properly collimated. Your tissue might also reject the implants.

Clarence
 
For me, it's been more frustration at Kodak than genuine anger, although I've often shaken my head at just how many blown calls Rochester has made in just the past five years, never mind the ten preceding (I've felt the same about Apple, but at least they've pretty much gotten it back together). I'm hip to film no longer being front-and-center in their business model, so long as I can still get (most of) the stuff from them until I find a "digital capture solution" that I can truly warm up to, and possibly afford. But if they don't get it together on the digital front, I fear we'll have another Big Dead Photo Outfit on our hands before too long, where nobody gets anything. "Innovate or Die" never rang more true.


- Barrett
 
Last edited:
amateriat said:
Oh, man...reading way too much Gibson. (The other one, that is.)


- Barrett

Who's the non-William?

I completely agree with you on the neccessity of maintaining a balance in the digital revolution.Being a luddite is a luxury that only the consumer can afford. The producer has to adapt or die, and I'd rather have a live Frankenstein's monster than a dead one.

Clarence
 
With digital it's all about the application layer. There are a lot of clever people in Rochester, but Kodak had a moribund middle management layer that didn't really know that. Maybe that layer has been retrained or replaced, I don't know, but I also hope this is successful.

But I still need to do touchy-feely with digital cameras. Not happy with what I've seen so far.
 
Back
Top Bottom