Like Tree19Likes

The end of focus?

Reply
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,378

    Well I assume what we are actually seeing is a flash animation though i could be wrong. To see (and manipulate) this type of image, you would need some form of bespoke image viewing software. I'll check when I am on a computer what it is on the website. I will be astounded if they can keep comparable quality and comparable file size. I just don't see how it is possible unless a new compressed data format is also announced.

    Sent from my GT-P1000 using GeoClicks Mobile


  2. #32

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,378

    Yes. I just checked. What we all saw was a flash animation.


  3. #33

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,378

    Also, just another point to consider. I am sorry I am invading this thread so much. Unless the additional lenses in the system are optically perfect (=expensive), there will be a loss of quality with the light having gone through two sets of lenses. Think of cheap "x2" lens magnifiers currently on the market.

    It will be interesting to see what the quality is like. It will determine who the target market is.


  4. #34

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,638
    Quote Originally Posted by 100LL
    Ng insists that the file size will be roughly comparable to the average size of todays digital photos. Also, if they would actually store "the equivalent to many tens, hundreds or even thousands of conventional photos", then the examples on their web sites (on which we all clicked around) would be huge, wouldn't they? (even with their lower resolution)
    The new information in these images would compress extremely well. Just like movies can store the intermediate changes between frames instead of complete frames something similar could be employed here. Files with a lot of spatially or temporally similar information are highly compressible.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,257

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    4,016

    Does "Steorn" ring a bell with anyone here?


  7. #37

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Discovery Bay
    Posts
    55

    Thom Hogan writes an interesting (and concise) few entries in his blog/news section - the first one is June 22 ("A New Way of Imaging") and the latest is a follow up to that. I enjoy reading all of his stuff anyway, but he sums it up for me nicely by saying:

    ...What's the downside? Well, the prototype required a 16mp sensor array to produce a 90kp image. Some similar relationship is expected for a production camera....
    I don't want to rip a load from his site so read away! Thom's 2011 News
    vinyljunky likes this.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,378

    Succinctly put. This explains my concerns with the quality issue and also explains why Ng chose such a sophisticated (MF) sensor for his trials. 90 kilopixels is tiny in whoever's language. A gimmick (notwithstanding the interesting technology) but until much larger sensors become much more affordable, I suppose this argument is moot. Even when that time comes, I still think that for the pro, sharpening will be a more important benefit than the ability to refocus.


  9. #39

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    781

    Either way, it should be interesting to see how this turns out. If I were Ng I would license the technology, and not try to penetrate a saturated consumer market. But then again, I don't have a PhD, so it may be a smart move after all!

    TigerSun likes this.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,378

    In my humble experience, scientists are awful businessmen.

    He should either do that or sell his start up which includes the IP for a nice and tidy profit. The worst thing he can do is to take himself too seriously and attempt to play with the big camera hitters.

    TigerSun likes this.

Reply
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast