Krilnon

Krilnon

Lives in United States Cambridge, MA, United States
Works as a research
Joined on Oct 15, 2011

Comments

Total: 4, showing: 1 – 4
In reply to:

wetsleet: This is just a one-off, so not really the same issue as that other 'designer' camera, the Pentax K-01 - but I still hope he comes up with something that makes more sense as a camera, whilst still reflecting his design flair. Good luck to him.

As to what I would like to see - start from a clean sheet, think of the camera as the thing that gets in the way of taking a picture, and come up with something which gets in the way as little as possible. So many cameras are still predicated on designs which answered the problem of how to spool a 35mm film out of its cartridge onto a bobbin whilst keeping it flat where it traversed the focal plane, and where to stick the pentaprism. So we still basically have the box with a cylinder mounted front and centre, with an angular bump on top. Chuck it all out and start again!

What did you think of the Lytro design?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2012 at 04:18 UTC
In reply to:

mike051051: I suppose I'm just too jaded after being in digital cameras for 17 years, but I see this as a 21st century version of snake oil. Camera takes a bunch of pictures, not very well but quickly; online software to display the "focus planes" looks a lot like Helicon Focus in a different wrapper; CEO and Executive Chairman swap places, possibly to see if Chi can do a better job raising working capital than Ng did; etc., etc., etc.
I'm just sayin'

It technically only takes one picture… the result is just interpreted differently. Here's a partially-contrived view of what the sensor captures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/corbyz/7005487993/sizes/k/in/photostream/

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2012 at 19:40 UTC
On Just Posted: Lytro Light Field Camera review and video article (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

Octane: The effect is cool, the resolution is the deal breaker. It's already very low, but the quality/detail is really poor on top of it. The edges between OOF objects and in focus objects is also not as smooth as you would see it from a conventional lens.

Second deal breaker is that all images only go through their web server. WTH?

As many have said already, it's fun to play with it for a minute, then you get bored because there is no purpose. Refocusing a photo isn't anything exciting, there is zero entertainment value.

The simple and cheap filters inside the Instagram/Hipstamatic app offer more creative looks and more fun (thus user satisfaction) even though they are very basic and sloppy. It's irrelevant how sophisticated this camera captures light rays, the end result isn't convincing in terms of quality nor fun or creative satisfaction.

There's also nothing stopping you from re-hosting the LFP files on another site. There are at least 3 people working on open source LFP viewers, or at least the version of LFP that the Lytro website display.

I'm working on one, for example, and it's really easy to extract the 5-or-so JPEGs from the LFP. It's a little harder to figure out what the depths are, but only because Lytro hasn't yet published any documentation about it.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2012 at 02:10 UTC
On Kodak to stop making digital cameras article (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Apewithacamera: The D800E Effect continues

I assumed Apewithacamera was joking.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2012 at 22:09 UTC
Total: 4, showing: 1 – 4