Lytro - next revolution in photography?

[r0xikat]

Light Field camera | Lytro

The selling point is the camera/lens will not have to be in focus to GET a picture in focus.

You can go back and re-center a blurry picture so that it will focus on whatever point you want.

I suppose the move from film to digital took the art out of developing a picture with chemicals by hand... and now this will take the art out of being able to focus with a lens on the fly by your own judgements.

"No more fighting with dials and settings and modes. No more flat, boring, static photographs. With a Lytro, you unleash the light" ... interesting indeed.

[groovyone]

I was just reading this on Engadget. Interesting.

[BenE]

So easy even a caveman can be a pro photographer.

[crbeveri]

I don't think it's gonna make a difference. After playing with the images a big you can still see where the point that was in focus is always way sharper than that out of focus. Seeing as to how a real photographer will strive to have his subject tack sharp this program, camera, whatever will not change the course. All it will do is introduce a new influx of lazy people with a camera that think they take great pictures but in reality this will never produce the images that those (many here too) who take the time and do it right can produce.

The digital age opened a new world of photography, it may have made it more competitive b/c you don't have to know/ do as much as in the 35mm days but I don't see this being anything like how digital effected film.

[kenw]

real art is a lot more that getting something in focus. or not in focus.

[crbeveri]

Originally Posted by kenw

real art is a lot more that getting something in focus. or not in focus.

this is all interpretive based on a single persons view of what art is. To me the 16th Chapel painting is just a painting... to others it's a master piece. To many Picasso was a wondrous painter that inspired a different eye of things... Although I agree there I still think his work is rubbish.

All art no matter what it is, is always interpreted differently from person to person. Art is also different from artist to artist and even within a single artist. I find this even in my own work; that depending on my mood, on day, my photography will change based on that mood.

I was clearly stating that in terms of this program or camera or whatever it is... it will not have the impact on photography that Digital did to film. The digital camera changed photography in a way that even the most amateur of person can get a decent looking picture. It also changed the way we can manipulate an image due to the development of the computer and software used in post. I do not see this as having the same impact as, as the OP said it may or may not, digital had to film.

[MicWayWal]

Originally Posted by crbeveri

I don't think it's gonna make a difference...

Really? Thats what some said about the prototype of the 35mm camera. With that kind of resistance to innovation we would still be taking indoor pictures with flash powder.
It still is a prototype at this point. But give it a few years and you never know where it will lead.
Things like this innovation could make the way we take photographs obsolete.

Look at the science behind what the camera is trying to do. This is the inventors first two paragraphs of his dissertation on the new concept of capturing an image.

This dissertation introduces a new approach to everyday photography, which solves the longstanding problems related to focusing images accurately. The root of these problems is missing information. It turns out that conventional photographs tell us rather little about the
light passing through the lens. In particular, they do not record the amount of light traveling along individual rays that contribute to the image. They tell us only the sum total of light
rays striking each point in the image. To make an analogy with a music-recording studio,
taking a conventional photograph is like recording all the musicians playing together, rather
than recording each instrument on a separate audio track.
In this dissertation, we will go ate the missing information. With micron-scale changes
to its optics and sensor, we can enhance a conventional camera so that it measures the light
along each individual ray lowing into the image sensor. In other words, the enhanced camera samples the total geometric distribution of light passing through the lens in a single
exposure. The price we will pay is collecting much more data than a regular photograph.
However, I hope to convince you that the price is a very fair one for a solution to a problem
as pervasive and long-lived as photographic focus. In photography, as in recording music, it
is wise practice to save as much of the source data as you can

The whole dissertation is here: http://www.lytro.com/renng-thesis.pdf

[Angelo]

Let's allow the concept to develop.
I remember my first Sony digital. It was nice but the quality was just under a drug store disposable camera - Look at digital now.

[MicWayWal]

Originally Posted by crbeveri

... it will not have the impact on photography that Digital did to film. The digital camera changed photography ... I do not see this as having the same impact as, as the OP said it may or may not, digital had to film.

Actually the digital camera did not change photography all that much. We just found a digital way to do things we could already do with film cameras. This made it easier for the masses but for the professional it was just an adaptation. The real changes are ahead of us.

I think this new type of camera capture is more like the change from daguerreotype to emulsion based capture.

[crbeveri]

Yes really, and if Ben Franklin hadn't shocked a key with lightning we wouldn't understand electricity like we do, If Thomas Edison hadn't invented the light bulb we would all be still eating under candle light.... I am clearly saying that I don't think it's gonna have the same effect as quick and as big as digital had. Who knows what will come in 10 years.... I remember listening to vinals when a child and then the casset tape came out and then CD's even mini cd's now blue disks and flash media that holds even more. No matter what happens technology is gonna improve and change... thus is what evolution is. Although this will effect the market in the distant future people will always set them self away form this and always be able to tell who put the effort into making a great image and who just took a picture and post processed it to try and make it look good... Someone who is truly skilled with the medium (Be it film or Digital) can take an image straight from the camera and have to apply little Post to is (depending on the look). I say depending on the look b/c with the digital art era now we can manipulate images in a way that are very surreal.

Originally Posted by MicWayWal

Really? Thats what some said about the prototype of the 35mm camera. With that kind of resistance to innovation we would still be taking indoor pictures with flash powder.
It still is a prototype at this point. But give it a few years and you never know where it will lead.
Things like this innovation could make the way we take photographs obsolete.

Look at the science behind what the camera is trying to do. This is the inventors first two paragraphs of his dissertation on the new concept of capturing an image.

This dissertation introduces a new approach to everyday photography, which solves the longstanding problems related to focusing images accurately. The root of these problems is missing information. It turns out that conventional photographs tell us rather little about the
light passing through the lens. In particular, they do not record the amount of light traveling along individual rays that contribute to the image. They tell us only the sum total of light
rays striking each point in the image. To make an analogy with a music-recording studio,
taking a conventional photograph is like recording all the musicians playing together, rather
than recording each instrument on a separate audio track.
In this dissertation, we will go ate the missing information. With micron-scale changes
to its optics and sensor, we can enhance a conventional camera so that it measures the light
along each individual ray lowing into the image sensor. In other words, the enhanced camera samples the total geometric distribution of light passing through the lens in a single
exposure. The price we will pay is collecting much more data than a regular photograph.
However, I hope to convince you that the price is a very fair one for a solution to a problem
as pervasive and long-lived as photographic focus. In photography, as in recording music, it
is wise practice to save as much of the source data as you can

The whole dissertation is here: http://www.lytro.com/renng-thesis.pdf

[crbeveri]

Originally Posted by MicWayWal

Actually the digital camera did not change photography all that much. We just found a digital way to do things we could already do with film cameras. This made it easier for the masses but for the professional it was just an adaptation. The real changes are ahead of us.

I think this new type of camera capture is more like the change from daguerreotype to emulsion based capture.

I am not saying it cant be done but having seen the post processing that went into this picture http://iodp.tamu.edu/scienceops/gall...exp323_075.jpg I would be extremely impressed to see it done with film. That being said... it did change things. Digital art and what someone can do with a photograph in post changed things a lot more than the simple movement of going from a flash bulb to 35mm film.


This is ALL based on personal opinion and so everyone opinion will and can be different. I am not saying anyone is wrong I am just stating what I believe.... to question ones personal opinion is fine but never can someone say their opinion is wrong when it comes to something like this w/o the facts and data prof to back it up.

[z-monster]

Baahahahahahahahahaha! Awesome!

Looks like anyone can be a Wedding photog when this thing comes out.

GWC's will more rampant than ever before.

Senoir Portraits? With Lytro, Mom & Dad can do that from now on!

[auddii]

Originally Posted by MicWayWal

Really? Thats what some said about the prototype of the 35mm camera. With that kind of resistance to innovation we would still be taking indoor pictures with flash powder.
It still is a prototype at this point. But give it a few years and you never know where it will lead.
Things like this innovation could make the way we take photographs obsolete.

Look at the science behind what the camera is trying to do. This is the inventors first two paragraphs of his dissertation on the new concept of capturing an image.

This dissertation introduces a new approach to everyday photography, which solves the longstanding problems related to focusing images accurately. The root of these problems is missing information. It turns out that conventional photographs tell us rather little about the
light passing through the lens. In particular, they do not record the amount of light traveling along individual rays that contribute to the image. They tell us only the sum total of light
rays striking each point in the image. To make an analogy with a music-recording studio,
taking a conventional photograph is like recording all the musicians playing together, rather
than recording each instrument on a separate audio track.
In this dissertation, we will go ate the missing information. With micron-scale changes
to its optics and sensor, we can enhance a conventional camera so that it measures the light
along each individual ray lowing into the image sensor. In other words, the enhanced camera samples the total geometric distribution of light passing through the lens in a single
exposure. The price we will pay is collecting much more data than a regular photograph.
However, I hope to convince you that the price is a very fair one for a solution to a problem
as pervasive and long-lived as photographic focus. In photography, as in recording music, it
is wise practice to save as much of the source data as you can

The whole dissertation is here: http://www.lytro.com/renng-thesis.pdf

Apparently I am a huge dork because this sounds like an absolutely fascinating read...

[r0xikat]

Originally Posted by auddii

Apparently I am a huge dork because this sounds like an absolutely fascinating read...

yup, I have the dissertation open for random reading while I work

[andyz]

I don't see how it will do 3D with one lens unless the image is double processed. In any case, I just want Apple to put it in iPhone 5. :)