I think the parallax effect capable with a light field camera is a natural fit for the iPhone.
Being able to control the 3D view using the gyroscopes in iPhones and iPads would be magical. Apple loves magical.
We are getting closer to being able to reproduce the still photos from Gallifrey.
That would be cool ... Apple just need that extra dimensional ability in there ...
It occurs to me this technology could be used reciprocally ... as in allowing a Mac or iDevice far more adaptive reading (fuzzy math AI?) of a user's motion with their recently acquired tracking system.
The file sizes on refocus-able video would be huge.
Not necessarily. A video could be 'extracted' from a single image by recording the movement through the DOF and various angles. I would imagine a simple iOS app could do this for you. But I understand what you meant...
I am about the farthest thing form a camera expert there is.
I've been doing a lot of surfing/research about cameras in the last several days...
My 17-year-old (18 in January) [I]thinks[/I] she is interested in photography. She has suggested to her parents and to me that instead of buying her separate Christmas, birthday and graduation gifts -- that we pool the money so she can spend $1,500-$2,000 on a good DSLR camera, lenses, filters, bag, accessories...
Her dad feels that $2,000 is too much for a [I]starter[/I] camera -- especially since she only [B][I]thinks[/I][/B] she is interested.
As it turns out, I have some old film DSLR kit that my mother bought in the mid 1970s. This includes bag, filters, tripod, and lenses -- Pentax K-Mount lenses.
So part of my research has been to determine if we could buy only a camera base and Pentax adapter, period -- use the Pentax lenses and existing kit as a more [financially] gentle introduction to DSLR photography. Then if things work out, she can earn money by filming weddings, church and sports events -- and buy lenses, etc. later, from a position of need and knowledge.
Another reason for my research is the recent Apple related articles related to cameras -- this article, some other patent articles, and the PrimeSense purchase.
In no particular order here is what I have found: [LIST] [*] The DSLR market is going South in a way similar to the PC market. The reason appears to be that high-end smart phones are good enough that you don't need to carry (or buy) a DSLR camera except for special needs [*] Steve Jobs said he wanted to reinvent photography [*] A critical spec of a camera is its light gathering capability [*] A critical spec of focusing a camera is physical movement of the optics (lenses) [*] A potential alternative to a large, protruding, lens is folded optics [*] The patent in this article involves physical movement of the optics [*] High-end cameras have capability to do image stabilization and other [I]processing[/I] [*] High-end cameras have less compute, motion and graphics processing capability than high-end phones [/LIST]
So... Here are some interesting questions.
[B][U]What if Apple decided to make a camera -- a camera with an A7 64-bit APU, M7 Motion sensor, etc?[/U][/B] Even with a cell radio, it could be very price competitive with a mid-range DSLR camera body. And, it would blow the socks off the DSLR as far as image manipulation, processing power, features, etc.
[B][U]What if Apple were to replace the current Apple Logo on the back of iPads and iPhones with the camera lens? [/U][/B] The Logo is about 5-6 X the area of the current camera lens aperture -- this could improve the critical light-gathering capability of the iPhone and iPad Cameras.
[B][U]Could the [circa 2009] Folded Optics technology be updated to provide, say, 3-5 X Optical Zoom with no physical lens protrusion or movement?[/U][/B] This could make an iPhone or iPad form factor quite competitive with a DSLR camera with a basic lens.
[B][U]Could the patent in this article be used in an iPhone or iPad (or an Apple Camera) to offer after-the-fact focus capability not available in high-end DSLR cameras?[/U][/B]
[B][U]Could the 3D Depth-Sense and unique object identification/tracking of the PrimeSense technology be integrated with the normal camera capabilities of the iPhone and iPad (or an Apple camera)?[/U][/B]
How long until the crop of Android also rans announces that their phones will have light field cameras? It happens pretty much every time Apple does anything innovative, or possible innovation is even hinted at. Samsung and Google rush to release their product before Apple, and most of the time the rush job is apparent in the quality, or lack there of.
Considering Apple didn't invent the light-field camera, I don't think that will be a valid complaint when another company implements some version of it. I imagine most companies know that they can't get too close to Apple's patented version now that Samsung has lost that big lawsuit.
This is not on ground as shaky as a lot of software patents Apple applies for, but it still seems like something not worthy of a patent due to obviousness. Here Apple has attached an existing technology to a basic mechanism for movement. It would be the same if I invented frosted glass window panes and then someone came behind me and patented a door with a frosted glass window.
It's different because it's in a door!
Edit: To be clear, I am very excited that Apple is looking at light-field cameras for smartphones. I'm just not excited that they're trying to patent this implementation.
This is not on ground as shaky as a lot of software patents Apple applies for, but it still seems like something not worthy of a patent due to obviousness. Here Apple has attached an existing technology to a basic mechanism for movement. It would be the same if I invented frosted glass window panes and then someone came behind me and patented a door with a frosted glass window.
It's different because it's in a door!
Edit: To be clear, I am very excited that Apple is looking at light-field cameras for smartphones. I'm just not excited that they're trying to patent this implementation.
Isn't software-controlled physical movement of camera optics within a sealed camera a pretty big deal -- can you provide a link to someone who has done that before?
Isn't software-controlled physical movement of camera optics within a sealed camera a pretty big deal -- can you provide a link to someone who has done that before?
Isn't that what auto-focus does? Sure it's adjusting lenses fore and aft as opposed to up and down, but it's still a software-controlled physical movement of camera optics within a sealed camera system.
Isn't software-controlled physical movement of camera optics within a sealed camera a pretty big deal -- can you provide a link to someone who has done that before?
I can't find a camera that switches out lenses like this so it might be more "novel" than I thought.
I am about the farthest thing form a camera expert there is.
I've been doing a lot of surfing/research about cameras in the last several days...
My 17-year-old (18 in January) thinks she is interested in photography. She has suggested to her parents and to me that instead of buying her separate Christmas, birthday and graduation gifts -- that we pool the money so she can spend $1,500-$2,000 on a good DSLR camera, lenses, filters, bag, accessories...
Her dad feels that $2,000 is too much for a starter camera -- especially since she only thinks she is interested.
As it turns out, I have some old film DSLR kit that my mother bought in the mid 1970s. This includes bag, filters, tripod, and lenses -- Pentax K-Mount lenses.
So part of my research has been to determine if we could buy only a camera base and Pentax adapter, period -- use the Pentax lenses and existing kit as a more [financially] gentle introduction to DSLR photography. Then if things work out, she can earn money by filming weddings, church and sports events -- and buy lenses, etc. later, from a position of need and knowledge.
Another reason for my research is the recent Apple related articles related to cameras -- this article, some other patent articles, and the PrimeSense purchase.
In no particular order here is what I have found:
The DSLR market is going South in a way similar to the PC market. The reason appears to be that high-end smart phones are good enough that you don't need to carry (or buy) a DSLR camera except for special needs
Steve Jobs said he wanted to reinvent photography
A critical spec of a camera is its light gathering capability
A critical spec of focusing a camera is physical movement of the optics (lenses)
A potential alternative to a large, protruding, lens is folded optics
The patent in this article involves physical movement of the optics
High-end cameras have capability to do image stabilization and other processing
High-end cameras have less compute, motion and graphics processing capability than high-end phones
So... Here are some interesting questions.
What if Apple decided to make a camera -- a camera with an A7 64-bit APU, M7 Motion sensor, etc? Even with a cell radio, it could be very price competitive with a mid-range DSLR camera body. And, it would blow the socks off the DSLR as far as image manipulation, processing power, features, etc.
What if Apple were to replace the current Apple Logo on the back of iPads and iPhones with the camera lens? The Logo is about 5-6 X the area of the current camera lens aperture -- this could improve the critical light-gathering capability of the iPhone and iPad Cameras.
Could the [circa 2009] Folded Optics technology be updated to provide, say, 3-5 X Optical Zoom with no physical lens protrusion or movement? This could make an iPhone or iPad form factor quite competitive with a DSLR camera with a basic lens.
Could the patent in this article be used in an iPhone or iPad (or an Apple Camera) to offer after-the-fact focus capability not available in high-end DSLR cameras?
Could the 3D Depth-Sense and unique object identification/tracking of the PrimeSense technology be integrated with the normal camera capabilities of the iPhone and iPad (or an Apple camera)?
Mmm...
Nikon and Canon beware!
Excellent post and lots to think about. Seriously Apple could really do some amazing stuff if they worked with Canon for example.
Check out a Canon T3i or T4i 18MP and a few lenses which would depend on what she wants to photograph. Should be able to squeeze body and a couple of nice lenses in for around that 2K. Canon's latest IS is amazing. I have been Nikon and Canon user for over well 40 years but these days find I prefer the Canon gear. Plus of course, Aperture and Photoshop CS6. Like many things you get what you pay for and if she wants to be serious she needs decent gear. But hey, I'm biased.
Just as Digital killed Film, a "light field" camera will kill the fixed focal length photography. There is nothing that the fixed focal length camera can do, that the "light field" does just as well; and many very neat effects that are available on the "light field" camera, that are impossible to do with the fixed focal length camera.
Apple "gets it". The camera on the iPhone is disrupting the entire photography industry. This is the next revolutionary (rather than evolutionary) change.
This is just incorrect. A high-end DSLR with quality lenses will run circles around the Lytro, with or without the refocusing capability of the Lytro. As I understand it, images taken in the refocus mode are much lower resolution than the typical digital camera.
I am about the farthest thing form a camera expert there is.
I've been doing a lot of surfing/research about cameras in the last several days...
My 17-year-old (18 in January) thinks she is interested in photography. She has suggested to her parents and to me that instead of buying her separate Christmas, birthday and graduation gifts -- that we pool the money so she can spend $1,500-$2,000 on a good DSLR camera, lenses, filters, bag, accessories...
Her dad feels that $2,000 is too much for a starter camera -- especially since she only thinks she is interested.
As a practical matter, a 17-year old should be finding way to pay for a $2000+ camera herself, or at least come up with a better plan than "asking for more expensive gifts"
I personally think a 17-year old needs to start solving problems with, and living within resource constraints. It's a crucial skill.
It also suggests that if it was her money, she might pick more modest equipment to learn photography with. I mean, if someone wants to learn to be a race car driver, Formula One is not the place to start. Let the $2000+ camera be the goal, not the starting point.
Some Color on this patent and IP: John Border a former scientist/engineer with Kodak originally applied in 2011 for this 8,593,564 patent, granted on Nov. 26th 2013 to Apple. This is one of two things: Either Border is working on behalf of Apple now, ex Kodak, or this is part of the IP/patent package that Kodak sold last year and Apple, MS, Google and Intellectual Ventures (troll) bought as defensive patents. It has absolutely nothing to do with Lytro other than using Ng's invention as prior art.
To Hodar, There is a trade off in signal/noise and dynamic range when using post image processing or stereoscopic to define an entirely focused image, or selectively focused. This is why you do not see LF cameras yet in machine vision or scientific applications.
This has already been done in a free app for Windows phones. The app is called Nokia Refocus and it does exactly what the lytro cameras do for FREE! You can change the focus point of your image after the you have captured the image. It also enables you to make the entire frame in focus.
I installed the app on my Nokia 928 and it works great!
You can read more about in the announcement covered by The Verge website:
This has already been done in a free app for Windows phones. The app is called Nokia Refocus and it does exactly what the lytro cameras do for FREE! You can change the focus point of your image after the you have captured the image. It also enables you to make the entire frame in focus.
I installed the app on my Nokia 928 and it works great!
You can read more about in the announcement covered by The Verge website:
"Nokia’s not using any unique hardware to refocus images after they’re taken, instead the app simply shoots between two and eight photos to support the refocus feature afterwards."
Translation: It does neither what the Lytro HW or this patent does and you aren't changing the focus point of the image after the fact because that's impossible without a light-field camera, instead Nokia's app simple chooses one of the other images it previous took.
Comments
Because of what they’ll do with the patent.
Don't be waggin' your Lytro thing at me, Walt.
No, but AppleInsider acquired all of Apple's patent illustrations, apparently
That would be cool ... Apple just need that extra dimensional ability in there ...
It occurs to me this technology could be used reciprocally ... as in allowing a Mac or iDevice far more adaptive reading (fuzzy math AI?) of a user's motion with their recently acquired tracking system.
Not necessarily. A video could be 'extracted' from a single image by recording the movement through the DOF and various angles. I would imagine a simple iOS app could do this for you. But I understand what you meant...
I keep saying ... AI AKA Samsung/Google R&D Department ...
I am about the farthest thing form a camera expert there is.
I've been doing a lot of surfing/research about cameras in the last several days...
My 17-year-old (18 in January) [I]thinks[/I] she is interested in photography. She has suggested to her parents and to me that instead of buying her separate Christmas, birthday and graduation gifts -- that we pool the money so she can spend $1,500-$2,000 on a good DSLR camera, lenses, filters, bag, accessories...
Her dad feels that $2,000 is too much for a [I]starter[/I] camera -- especially since she only [B][I]thinks[/I][/B] she is interested.
As it turns out, I have some old film DSLR kit that my mother bought in the mid 1970s. This includes bag, filters, tripod, and lenses -- Pentax K-Mount lenses.
So part of my research has been to determine if we could buy only a camera base and Pentax adapter, period -- use the Pentax lenses and existing kit as a more [financially] gentle introduction to DSLR photography. Then if things work out, she can earn money by filming weddings, church and sports events -- and buy lenses, etc. later, from a position of need and knowledge.
Another reason for my research is the recent Apple related articles related to cameras -- this article, some other patent articles, and the PrimeSense purchase.
In no particular order here is what I have found:
[LIST]
[*] The DSLR market is going South in a way similar to the PC market. The reason appears to be that high-end smart phones are good enough that you don't need to carry (or buy) a DSLR camera except for special needs
[*] Steve Jobs said he wanted to reinvent photography
[*] A critical spec of a camera is its light gathering capability
[*] A critical spec of focusing a camera is physical movement of the optics (lenses)
[*] A potential alternative to a large, protruding, lens is folded optics
[*] The patent in this article involves physical movement of the optics
[*] High-end cameras have capability to do image stabilization and other [I]processing[/I]
[*] High-end cameras have less compute, motion and graphics processing capability than high-end phones
[/LIST]
So... Here are some interesting questions.
[B][U]What if Apple decided to make a camera -- a camera with an A7 64-bit APU, M7 Motion sensor, etc?[/U][/B] Even with a cell radio, it could be very price competitive with a mid-range DSLR camera body. And, it would blow the socks off the DSLR as far as image manipulation, processing power, features, etc.
[B][U]What if Apple were to replace the current Apple Logo on the back of iPads and iPhones with the camera lens? [/U][/B] The Logo is about 5-6 X the area of the current camera lens aperture -- this could improve the critical light-gathering capability of the iPhone and iPad Cameras.
[B][U]Could the [circa 2009] Folded Optics technology be updated to provide, say, 3-5 X Optical Zoom with no physical lens protrusion or movement?[/U][/B] This could make an iPhone or iPad form factor quite competitive with a DSLR camera with a basic lens.
[B][U]Could the patent in this article be used in an iPhone or iPad (or an Apple Camera) to offer after-the-fact focus capability not available in high-end DSLR cameras?[/U][/B]
[B][U]Could the 3D Depth-Sense and unique object identification/tracking of the PrimeSense technology be integrated with the normal camera capabilities of the iPhone and iPad (or an Apple camera)?[/U][/B]
Mmm...
Considering Apple didn't invent the light-field camera, I don't think that will be a valid complaint when another company implements some version of it. I imagine most companies know that they can't get too close to Apple's patented version now that Samsung has lost that big lawsuit.
It's different because it's in a door!
Edit: To be clear, I am very excited that Apple is looking at light-field cameras for smartphones. I'm just not excited that they're trying to patent this implementation.
Isn't software-controlled physical movement of camera optics within a sealed camera a pretty big deal -- can you provide a link to someone who has done that before?
Isn't software-controlled physical movement of camera optics within a sealed camera a pretty big deal -- can you provide a link to someone who has done that before?
Isn't that what auto-focus does? Sure it's adjusting lenses fore and aft as opposed to up and down, but it's still a software-controlled physical movement of camera optics within a sealed camera system.
Isn't software-controlled physical movement of camera optics within a sealed camera a pretty big deal -- can you provide a link to someone who has done that before?
I can't find a camera that switches out lenses like this so it might be more "novel" than I thought.
Nikon and Canon beware!
Excellent post and lots to think about. Seriously Apple could really do some amazing stuff if they worked with Canon for example.
Check out a Canon T3i or T4i 18MP and a few lenses which would depend on what she wants to photograph. Should be able to squeeze body and a couple of nice lenses in for around that 2K. Canon's latest IS is amazing. I have been Nikon and Canon user for over well 40 years but these days find I prefer the Canon gear. Plus of course, Aperture and Photoshop CS6. Like many things you get what you pay for and if she wants to be serious she needs decent gear. But hey, I'm biased.
This is just incorrect. A high-end DSLR with quality lenses will run circles around the Lytro, with or without the refocusing capability of the Lytro. As I understand it, images taken in the refocus mode are much lower resolution than the typical digital camera.
As a practical matter, a 17-year old should be finding way to pay for a $2000+ camera herself, or at least come up with a better plan than "asking for more expensive gifts"
I personally think a 17-year old needs to start solving problems with, and living within resource constraints. It's a crucial skill.
It also suggests that if it was her money, she might pick more modest equipment to learn photography with. I mean, if someone wants to learn to be a race car driver, Formula One is not the place to start. Let the $2000+ camera be the goal, not the starting point.
To Hodar, There is a trade off in signal/noise and dynamic range when using post image processing or stereoscopic to define an entirely focused image, or selectively focused. This is why you do not see LF cameras yet in machine vision or scientific applications.
I installed the app on my Nokia 928 and it works great!
You can read more about in the announcement covered by The Verge website:
http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/13/5099000/nokia-refocus-download-for-pureview-lumia-windows-phones
"Nokia’s not using any unique hardware to refocus images after they’re taken, instead the app simply shoots between two and eight photos to support the refocus feature afterwards."
Translation: It does neither what the Lytro HW or this patent does and you aren't changing the focus point of the image after the fact because that's impossible without a light-field camera, instead Nokia's app simple chooses one of the other images it previous took.