Roland Karlsson

Lives in Sweden Stockholm, Sweden
Works as a Programmer
Joined on Feb 23, 2002
About me:

Collector of K-mount and M42 stuff. Main camera K-1. Also interested in camera technology, e.g. Foveon. Also interested in computer based image analysis and transforms.

Comments

Total: 4273, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Fotoni: Pentax K-1 can use electronic shutter with live view, so is it possible to do automatic fixed interval shutter pressing with SDK, so it would be same as timelapse mode?

Another interesting, but more limited function would be automatic bracketing combined with pixel shift. Internal buffer should hold up to four RAW brackets with pixel shift (4x4=16).

WiFi support for iOS and Android.
USB support for .NET for Windows and C++ for Windows, Linux and Mac.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2018 at 22:07 UTC
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Maybe it is the same reason that they did not sell IR cameras. It was said that IR cameras could see through clothes. But this fantastic google software can automatically replace unseen things, so just ask the software to remove the clothes. Voilla! Nude pictures! And that we cannot have in prudent US.

If you say so, English is not my first language.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2018 at 22:04 UTC

Maybe it is the same reason that they did not sell IR cameras. It was said that IR cameras could see through clothes. But this fantastic google software can automatically replace unseen things, so just ask the software to remove the clothes. Voilla! Nude pictures! And that we cannot have in prudent US.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2018 at 22:57 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Klipsen: If you cannot make it work - or work properly - just say it never was high on your list of priorities.

By the way: Remember the photographer who photoshopped out a pair of legs behind a poster … and was fired, banned and critisised for altering the truth, even though those feet had no other function in that image except being an eye-turd?
That could also be part of the reason.

It would have been nice to give that photo, with the legs, to this software and ask it to remove the sign.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2018 at 22:53 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: I'm wondering if it had more to do with potential violation of copyrights (ie. people using it to remove watermarks). Especially since Google and Getty had a more recent legal issue (which has been pretty much resolved). So I wonder if that has anything to do with this technology being knocked down on the priority list.... Granted the Getty/Google issue was related more to usage of images, I'm thinking Google is being careful here as well, and that the reason given is more of an excuse for the true underlying reason.

To be able to replace it, it needs to find it. I think it needs another software to detect the watermark to replace.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2018 at 21:48 UTC
In reply to:

starbase218: This is very nice. All camera manufacturers should do this.

A web server in the camera and a rest interface would be cool. But - I think almost all cameras use some kind of special protocol, propriety or not.

Many cameras use PTP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picture_Transfer_Protoco on USB.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2018 at 13:02 UTC
In reply to:

Lan: Bravo Pentax! A good first step, but unless I'm mistaken this doesn't allow you to run code on the camera itself? That's the feature that would be a game changer!

I really want a company sanctioned CHDK/MagicLantern equivalent.

Just a comment. I guess that, if they do a scripted environment that runs on the camera, with an API, then this API is probably very similar to the one they now have released, plus an API for adding the functionality to menus in the camera.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2018 at 10:41 UTC
In reply to:

starbase218: This is very nice. All camera manufacturers should do this.

Yes, if there already is an app, it is possible. But - maybe the app is very limited? Happens. Then the question is, is there more in the protocol than the app uses?

Yes, you can add exception handling in the camera. Right now we are discussing open up existing cameras though.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2018 at 10:29 UTC
In reply to:

starbase218: This is very nice. All camera manufacturers should do this.

You can only do this if the camera is suitable for it. It needs, of course, to have the communication means. Then, the communication also needs to be safe, so you, e.g. can not damage the camera.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2018 at 10:04 UTC
In reply to:

Lan: Bravo Pentax! A good first step, but unless I'm mistaken this doesn't allow you to run code on the camera itself? That's the feature that would be a game changer!

I really want a company sanctioned CHDK/MagicLantern equivalent.

@hammarbytp - what you describe is essentially a sandboxed environment where you can run a script language with a limited API. This is OK. That would then replace the need for USB or WiFi access, but adds the functions to some menu in the user interface instead. OK, it might be fun. So, we are in agreement.

The important thing here is how limited the API is. Can it only do more complex intervallometers? Can you do DOF stacking? Can you do automatic lens AF calibration? Can you combine AstroTracer with pixel shift? Can you combine AstroTracer with MultiExposure? Can you program apodisation? Can you focus while taking a long exposure? ...

Link | Posted on May 20, 2018 at 10:01 UTC
In reply to:

koolbreez: What a misleading reason. Google did not release this because it was a simple procedure using this automatic tool to completely, and accurately, remove all watermarks from pictures. That is the real reason they shelved it.

removed

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 19:36 UTC
In reply to:

MikeFairbanks: Google is progressing. They used to release programs that would become popular, and then would delete them unexpectedly. Now they've advanced to the point where they are deleting programs before they are even released.

In the future they will delete them before they are made.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 19:35 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: I'm wondering if it had more to do with potential violation of copyrights (ie. people using it to remove watermarks). Especially since Google and Getty had a more recent legal issue (which has been pretty much resolved). So I wonder if that has anything to do with this technology being knocked down on the priority list.... Granted the Getty/Google issue was related more to usage of images, I'm thinking Google is being careful here as well, and that the reason given is more of an excuse for the true underlying reason.

The tool can probably remove black text in the image. But - removing watermarks? Dont think so.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 11:05 UTC

Nice that all the lenses seems to have the same size.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 09:58 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

brycesteiner: All talk. It was one of those, "Don't take your eyes off us" scenarios. If this was so great then it would exist and they would be planning for the next three versions.

It is likely that it worked, but it might have been annoying for the user as it only works with a certain percentage. So, you might come home with a useless image.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 09:48 UTC
In reply to:

dpcane: Does the author really believe this?

"No, that wasn't a UFO, that was just a weather balloon"

"Ok, I'm good with that"

Weather balloons are much more common than ET flying around.

BTW - an UFO (strictly speaking) is any not (yet) identified flying object. So - the UFO might be a balloon.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 09:40 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: you can count on google to be a developer you cant count on ,

vaporware ..... they got all the oohs and ahhs they wanted at the time .... now they can listen to the oafs and dohs

Yes, this is unfortunately true. There is so much fantastic image software made. But it is 99 times of 100 just experiments and prototypes that never reaches photographers.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 09:38 UTC

There are some possibilities.

1. It does not really work that well for some reason. Some artifacts are to expected. Lots of cleaning up and fixing after the effect has been applied.

2. Automatic tools that invent obscured parts of the image might not be believed to be all that well received.

3. The usual one. In labs they invent and implement loots of cool stuff, but product management is not interested. Only a tiny percentage of cool image manipulating software ever hits the users.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 09:33 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

PhozoKozmos: i remember seeing this feature in samsung cameras ages ago
it did not seem to catch on
making unwanted visual intrusions (clutter) disappear from a busy scene

f

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 09:27 UTC
In reply to:

eaglenote: How large a Print would be needed to fully appreciate at this resolution?

I tried to compute that below, I think it would be 5x14 meters. Or maybe, as the image is a bit soft when zoomed in, 2.5x7 meters.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 08:42 UTC
Total: 4273, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »