More in the digital revolution

[Mike Anderson]

Here's a couple of uses: Focus near and far, with the middle out of focus. ...

Does that thing allow multiple planes of focus (in other words can everything be in focus)?

...Mike

[Brian C. Miller]

What the camera constructs is a digital file, with a number of focal planes (Lytro science link).

Without the advertising hyperbole, the lens is a normal zoom lens. The sensor simultaneously captures a number of focal planes, thus different objects are in focus for each plane. The images can be combined into one scene, as shown on the Lytro blog, so it appears as if everything is in focus. The price isn't too bad, $400 to $500 depending on finish.

[Mike Anderson]

...The images can be combined into one scene, as shown on the Lytro blog, so it appears as if everything is in focus...

I would of thought they'd emphasize that point more, like in their demos have a single button to bring everything into focus. An obvious post processing tool would be an editor with a focus brush and an unfocus brush. But I don't think they're targeting an artistic post processing market (probably the images once staticized are low res), they seem to be emphasizing simplicity and no shutter lag. And they're emphasizing the "living pictures" concept, which doesn't seem that exciting to me.

...Mike

[QT Luong]

The final (native) resolution of the images is, at best, 1080 pixels (square).

See an analysis I wrote a few months ago: http://bit.ly/mKKIJe

[Brian C. Miller]

An obvious post processing tool would be an editor with a focus brush and an unfocus brush.

Give it a little time, and I'm sure that Adobe and Gimp will read the files and have the brush. Yes, the camera is a bit of a gimmick, but I think that people might have a bit of fun with it.

[Nathan Potter]

I assume that this technology is similar to that discussed previously in a thread here.
Out of focus blur patterns are sampled with multiple pixels that can discriminate the various angles of the incoming ray bundle then software analysis can reconstruct the point of best focus for that blur. This reconstruction is then integrated over the whole frame yielding the various planes of best focus. If these planes are superimposed on one-another one could have a final image with infinite DOF I suppose. Very ingenious of course but taking a lot of computing power with sophisticated algorithms. As QT points out there will be a sacrifice in resolution as a function of how many pixels are needed to reconstruct the points of best focus.

The loss of resolution is intriguing because the blur pattern sampling can use the same pixels multiple times depending on exactly what the nature of the algorithm is. Thus the resolution loss could be greatly minimized, it seems. Not quite sure how directionality is determined at each pixel.

At first cut this seems like a gimmick that would excite the digi freaks.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Robert Hughes]

Why would you want everything in focus? Phone cameras do that already.

[Nathan Potter]

Why would you want everything in focus? Phone cameras do that already.

Most phone camera images I've seen seem to have nothing in focus. Drives me nuts watching some of these; they are so bad. Of course this is mostly poor resolution - and things are getting better.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[E. von Hoegh]

Here's a couple of uses: Focus near and far, with the middle out of focus. Make spasmodic videos of things jumping in and out of focus.

That will go well with the fashion of jump cutting every 15 seconds. (vomiting smiley)

[DrTang]

A solution to a problem which doesn't exist.


Steve.

I solve their "problem" by focusing