Say Sayonara to Blurry Pics

brightsky

brightsky

Established
Local time
1:54 PM
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
166
Location
Sunshine State
View My Gallery
Forget the Digital M. Forget the RD-2. Forget it all.

This will solve all but the worst GAS attacks. 😎


<a href="http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,69594,00.html?tw=rss.TEK">Say Sayonara to Blurry Pics</a>

PS:Hey, why didn't the href tag work?
 
Last edited:
true html often doesn't work properly here.. it's easier to click the "Go Advanced" button at the bottom of the screen and then do the "add link" command
 
I read another, more in-depth article about this somewhere, and one of the things it noted is that with this design, the pixel resolution is the same as the number of microlenses in the "plenoptic" array. The prototype camera (a Contax 645 fitted with a third-party digital back) had 90,000 microlenses, thus making it a 90-kilopixel camera with a five-digit price tag.

Sure, further development might be able to pack in more lenses -- but to paraphrase what Lawrence Olivier supposedly told Dustin Hoffman while working on Marathon Man, "wouldn't it be easier to just focus?"
 
that reminds me of a movie I never saw called "The Perfect Score".. where a group of supergeek high school students spend an exorbitant amount of time trying to hack into some testing center to get all the answers for their upcoming SAT in order to ace the test.. a movie reviewer summed it up perfectly by saying it would have been a whole lot easier for them to just study
 
But, what will rage-against-the-machine photo art students do now that their artistically-out-of-focus works can now be so bourgouisely be brought back into focus?
 
jlw said:
Sure, further development might be able to pack in more lenses -- but to paraphrase what Lawrence Olivier supposedly told Dustin Hoffman while working on Marathon Man, "wouldn't it be easier to just focus?"
Click to expand...

Sure, for those of us who still enjoy cameras that "only take pictures." (To paraphrase the guy at Trusted Reviews.)

This is not likely to hit the consumer market anytime soon, but if it did, and was affordable - to quote the late Chicago Cubs announcer, Jack Quinlan, "look out Wilmette. " 🙂
 
Wow, that's really cool! I'm totally geeked out. Just think of the creative possibilities of a raw image file coupled with the ability to refocus the image... there wouldn't be much you couldn't do to the photo in post-processing.

Should this ever become commercially feasible, I can just see the battle lines forming in the future over this. Forget the film-or-digital argument, I want ringside seats to this one 😀
 
I am with enochRoot on this one. Reminds me the little article I read couple of years ago about a new technology that makes it possible to locate people by their retinal profile when viewed from satelite cameras. And as some have pointed, I also likes to focus and to calculate depth of field... this thing does sound like a nice creative tool but the computerized organ never replaced the piano. Unfortunately, it looks like in the photography world market forces are much stronger. To those who wonder if we would be able to find film to put in our Leica (or other) cameras in 5 years, start wondering if you will be able to find a focusing camera in 10 years, or whether whatever giant Cat operating system mac would have by then would support a version of photoshop that would be able to read a "pre-focused" raw image.
 
JoeFriday said:
that reminds me of a movie I never saw called "The Perfect Score".. where a group of supergeek high school students spend an exorbitant amount of time trying to hack into some testing center to get all the answers for their upcoming SAT in order to ace the test.. a movie reviewer summed it up perfectly by saying it would have been a whole lot easier for them to just study
Click to expand...

It's like the guy at work (we all must know one) who spends 2 hours trying to avoid a boss who's trying to find him to give him an assignment that might take him 30 minutes to accomplish.
 
I totally welcome new technology and advancements in photography that change it farther and farther from the traditional technologies and processes. I hope thousands upon thousands of photographers embrace these new technologies and move away from traditional gear and processes. I will continue to persue the traditional photography that has brought me so much pleasure until now and will continue to do so in the future of my lifetime.

Please, don't anyone try and convince me of the superiority of digital vs traditional. I will not argue that digital and even newer technologies are the wave of the future. That I completely concede. I'm only saying that I will continue doing what I am already doing because that is what gives me pleasure. I don't begrudge anyone using digital. I hope more and more folks do. I'll be part of a group like the painters who continued to paint even after photography was invented, because that is what they liked to do. 🙂
 
I don't think this will be practical anytime soon, but it is an interesting way to think about how to form the image on the image plane. I might not use it myself, but it is a very cool idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom