Joseph S Wisniewski

Lives in United States Detroit, MI, United States
Works as a Speech and sensor scientist
Has a website at http://www.swissarmyfork.com
Joined on Jul 12, 2002
About me:

I've been in love with photography for over 40 years.

My favorite form of photography is macro, and much of my gear is of my own design.

I've done professional photography on and off for over 20 years.
Taught 8 years at Midwest Photography Workshops.
Designed 3 scientific digital cameras and 6 lenses.

Author of mImage and (coming soon to the App Store and Google Play) ColorForEveryone.

Comments

Total: 654, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Matsu: They need a large format digital back. LOL

If the film isn't pulled at a perfectly even rate, there are streaks on the print. It was hard enough learning to pull 4x5 (hint, hold the film steady, pull the camera away from the film). No way you can pull something with 25x the area.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2016 at 02:12 UTC
In reply to:

Matsu: They need a large format digital back. LOL

Actually, it has a motor drive. Granted, it's like one frame every 30 seconds, and needs to be plugged into a 110v outlet.

The 24x20 Polaroid uses two rolls of film that are driven through crushing rollers with a chemical "capsule". It's a bit big to pull by hand the way we did a 4x5.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 00:09 UTC
In reply to:

Bas Emmen: Techtalk blabla... Anyone noticed Rachelle di Stasio?

Actually, three people before you commented on her.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 00:04 UTC
In reply to:

Elliot H: the images that machine produced are nothing less than astounding

And the flashes. You're talking an emulsion that was ISO 75 when made (and is probably much lower aged 8 years) and a 1200mm f22 lens, which probably gets stopped down into the f64-f250 range.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2016 at 04:15 UTC
In reply to:

fmian: I'm sure the camera could still find a use with home made emulsions.

Have you got the formula for a color emulsion with a speed higher than ISO 3?

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2016 at 04:12 UTC
In reply to:

Tilted Plane: From what I've gathered elsewhere, John Reuter's business used old stock 20x24 Polaroid film that he bought up in the final days. He never made his own or had anyone make it (which would have probably been Fuji if it had the incentive). So the multi-millions needed to produce the film would mean a whole new start-up, and yes, it's not going to happen. I'll add (having helped organize a Reuter workshop at a photography center years ago), the whole process of sitting, shooting, and then seeing the physical results is something unique (and fabulous) in the history of photography, and it will be missed. You might come up with a digital semblance of it, but then they wouldn't be one-of-a-kind (necessarily) and they'd lack some primal alive-ness that these 20x24 prints have.

You are exactly correct. They are sitting on some stock of film produced by Polarioid eight years ago, and their testing says another two years and it's going to hit the point where it can't produce professional looking results any more.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2016 at 04:04 UTC

You want to "essentially kill off the green screen"?

Use a time-of-flight depth camera like a Kinect 2.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2016 at 03:00 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

matthiasbasler: To the calculations and assumptions done by dpreview. I agree that this video beast likely has (an needs to have) an excess of resolution in order to give the editor a real choice for focus.

WIth the Lytro Illum you could refocus your image to any point, but there was only a limited range in which the image was anything like sharp. (It had two maxima at depth -4 and +4 with a local minimum at ±0 where the image was just acceptable, but not really good. This left me with no real choice where to put my subjects if I wanted them to be sharp (~-6 to -2 and/or 2 to +6, roughly).
Excess resolution would give me the freedom to re-focus on anything from, lets say, -10 to +10 and still have an acceptable sharpness.

P.S. They Lytro Illum did not have a spatial resolution of 5MP! The spatial resolution is nowhere officially stated (afaik) and the camera can only export rather soft 4MP JPG files, the effective resolution is ~2MP in ideal conditions.

In other words, it will give you enough wiggle room to "clean up" after a focus puller's minor errors. But it can't really refocus anywhere in the scene, simulate rack focusing, etc.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2016 at 02:57 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph S Wisniewski: "The multiple perspectives captured mean you can generate 3D images or video from every shot at any desired parallax disparity"

Except that single point cameras are essentially useless for 3D video, because the occlusion is only correct from the single viewpoint. Moving the viewpoint means that you now need background that was blocked from the single viewpoint.

The end result is that the images look like bad automatic 3D conversions, until a skilled artist retouches all occluded areas.

The human interpupillary distance ranges from about 50-70mm, and 3D filmmakers tend to shoot a bit wider. The "correct perspective shift within a limited area" of a lightfield camera is limited by the aperture of the lens. To get a minimal 50mm interpupillary distance on a normal lens would require a 30mm f0.5 on a super-35mm sized sensor.

I stand by my observation that "single point cameras are essentially useless for 3D video" and for 3D work, the lightfield cameras are essentially single points.

Single point techniques only work in macro 3D focus stacking, where the interpupillary distances are on the order of 1mm, not 60mm, and the background is totally out of focus.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2016 at 02:51 UTC

"The multiple perspectives captured mean you can generate 3D images or video from every shot at any desired parallax disparity"

Except that single point cameras are essentially useless for 3D video, because the occlusion is only correct from the single viewpoint. Moving the viewpoint means that you now need background that was blocked from the single viewpoint.

The end result is that the images look like bad automatic 3D conversions, until a skilled artist retouches all occluded areas.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2016 at 03:55 UTC as 11th comment | 6 replies
On article Hands on with the Hasselblad H6D 50c/100c (267 comments in total)
In reply to:

sean lee: Wow... 100MP.... Unbelievable...
But with that price, I can buy BMW or Audi...
I thought Leica was the most expensive camera...
Wow...

You are mistaken. They got the idea from the same place Blad got it from, Creo Leaf.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2016 at 23:31 UTC
On article Hands on with the Hasselblad H6D 50c/100c (267 comments in total)
In reply to:

sean lee: Wow... 100MP.... Unbelievable...
But with that price, I can buy BMW or Audi...
I thought Leica was the most expensive camera...
Wow...

Leica is the most expensive camera. Hasselblad has nothing in platinum, or with diamonds or ostrich skin.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2016 at 06:02 UTC
In reply to:

Funkyd3121: Who in the hack can afford this??

At my peak as a product photographer, no problem.

A lot of high end product, architecture, glamour, wedding, and portrait photographers can afford things like that.

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2016 at 01:46 UTC
On article iPhone SE is a compact-sized iPhone 6s (184 comments in total)
In reply to:

timo: The right move. Those big phones are hopeless if you want to carry them around in your trouser pocket. The occasions when I really need a larger screen are rare.

I've noticed that the bigger phones, like an iPhone 6s+ or a Galaxy Note 4 actually feel smaller and more comfortable in the pocket than smaller phones.

The small ones always turn sideways, the big ones stay upright. I learned about this paradox shoving my work iPhone 6s+ in my pocket and noting that it actually felt more comfortable than my smaller Galaxy S4. My S7 edge should be arriving soon: I'm hoping it's large enough to feel small.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 03:55 UTC
In reply to:

Lars V: The question on my mind is, does the True Tone technology solve an actual problem, or does it create more problems (comparing two displays next to each other with different automatic whitepoint etc)?
Looking forward to hearing about actual experiences, here and elsewhere.

You've never had the misfortune of owning a phone or tablet with a white bezel. Half my dev phones are white, and it's a bloody nightmare (all my personal devices are a nice, sane black).

Every phone or tablet with a white bezel looks horrible. The bezel reflects the ambient white (2700K, 3200K, and 4300K seem to be popular indoors these days) while the display illuminates at an entirely different white point (for reasons unknown, often slightly warmer than daylight, up around 6000K).

The brain sets its white point somewhere in between (variably, depending on how interested it is in whatever is on the display) and the end result is that the display looks too cool, and the white bezel looks old and yellowed.

If they did this True Tone thing right, the display should match the bezel, and white will be white!

There's more detail in my post above yours.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 03:40 UTC

The "true tone" sensors will do something very important, adjust the display white point to match the environment. It won't really help too much with image viewing or processing, but it will keep white iPads from looking so horrid.

Hopefully, we'll be seeing this on the iPhone 7 soon.

I cringe whenever I have to use a white iPhone, because my lab is about 4300K and the iPhone white point is somewhere around 5800K, and when you concentrate on the display, the bezel looks so dingy yellow, like a piece of 25-year-old plastic.

I've always thought that was the reason Samsung doesn't make white phones or tablets any more.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 03:30 UTC as 34th comment
In reply to:

Old Cameras: I think they watched the Bourne identity series before coming up with these names. Blackstone and firefly sound like black ops.

Ah, Blackstone.

The magician who used to hawk "TV Magic Cards".

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 03:23 UTC
Total: 654, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »