Comments on: New Camera Lets You Focus Photos After the Fact

By: Matt L

Matt L — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 18:32:24 +0000

To those pointing out the picture quality, I agree they don’t seem to be top notch, but this IS the first run of this technology at a consumer level so we should probably cut them a little bit of slack. I imagine that improving the resolution is probably one of the number one priorities for the company.

By: Eric

Eric — Sat, 09 Jul 2011 02:37:07 +0000

I’m playing with the images just fine on my iPad, so it must not be using Flash.

By: jeffie

jeffie — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 14:06:53 +0000

makes me think of the immersive photos in blade runner… match it with multiple locations and you will have something very interesting

By: Kevin

Kevin — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:59:46 +0000

I agree with Chirs, June 24th. The picture is grainy. Could imagine as a professional showing up to a wedding or other photo shoot with this type of camera? They would probably give you a dirty look. Then there is the picture quality. Being grainy, how could you sell it?
On another note about the camera itself; Seems pretty cool as a fun travel camera for someone.

By: Backdrop Photography Stand

Backdrop Photography Stand — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 08:11:32 +0000

It is Wonderful photo and it is gives the really good picture and superb colors.

By: Pippa

Pippa — Sun, 26 Jun 2011 02:02:54 +0000

This could be potentially useful as a tool for a quick point and shoot- IF it is compatible with a Mac. (Personally I dislike having to use Windows based computers and even when I do life is indeed better without Flash.) However I agree with Chris – the picture is grainy and the refocus not sharp. I assume this is the best they can do – surely they would not put forward a poor example for it’s promotion – - -

By: chris

chris — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 04:40:49 +0000

call me cynical but i only found 3 or 4 focal points in the picture in the example picture. the picture itself is quite grainy. going by the example i see no reason why you can’t achieve such low quality refocus effect just by using a fully open shutter on a cheap camera and some software techniques to achieve some selective pseudo de-focus. you can clearly see some aberations on the boundary between defocussed flowers and focussed far landscape, for example. the technique of raytracing is used regularly for CG images. the example photo hardly compares to anything other than a very low quality picture. I’m not convinced (yet) that this is anything but some software, akin to the 360 go anywhere in the picture experience in the early nineties.

By: mannul

mannul — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:58:56 +0000

this is nice technology in world , thanks you for information New camera helps you to focus images after you shoot

By: Jean-Denis

Jean-Denis — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 20:36:12 +0000

Well no it’s not Apple’s problem. Unless as a start up you feel that putting your technology out of reach of 19 millions users – for no good reason, is a smart decision.

And 19 millions users is a lower bound. I got Flash off my computer 7 months ago, and I haven’t regretted it – ever. My computer is faster, crashes less often, runs longer on battery, can run more programs simultaneously before thrashing, is overall more responsive. Good riddance.

By: Eliot89

Eliot89 — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 20:13:09 +0000

Why is it that every piece of new technology must yield to compatibility with apple products? So people can’t view this stuff on the Ipad. OK… that’s not Lytro’s problem it’s Apple’s.

Really cool piece of technology. I hope I can get my hands on one soon.

By: Redshift

Redshift — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:45:34 +0000

I want one! Or one of it’s improved successors, since I rarely buy into first-gen products.
Pictures of my baby too often end up blurry, being able to go back and adjust the focus later will be wonderful!

By: Pete

Pete — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:38:51 +0000

Seems like a good tool to use for particle image velocimetry (PIV).

By: Schell

Schell — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:22:05 +0000

The “living pictures” running on Flash is really a non-issue as developing viewers for other platforms should be trivial. The fact that the “living picture” file format is easily parsed by a Flash application tells me that writing a viewer in C or C++ would be rather simple (and that app would be MUCH faster). I’d love to see the image binary!

By: shane

shane — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 15:09:56 +0000

Amazing. It is I see it but I don’t believe moment.

By: Bob D

Bob D — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 14:51:42 +0000

What kind of factor is the file size increased by to store the raw light-field data?

By: Plenoptic

Plenoptic — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 09:09:47 +0000

I think I’ll wait for the camera that can take 3-D colour digital holograms…

By: Maria

Maria — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 02:19:23 +0000

Sounds like a break into a new era of photography.
I personally believe that professional or serious photographers will be the ones to really appreciate this new technology.
Looking forward to the first DSLR!
Great idea, I like it!

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:05:57 +0000

Typo “instensity”

By: david

david — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:31:36 +0000

photography is dead. long live photography.

ok, maybe not photography. just the relevance of the photographer.

long live the editor!

By: Michael Berry

Michael Berry — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 18:36:43 +0000

Really innovative, I love it. I wonder what the highest quality you’ll be able to get out of these pictures is, though? For 2D photos, will the images be comparable to that of other popular consumer cameras like DSLR’s, or closer to the quality of a still image from a basic digital camcorder (like the Flip for instance)? It’s a totally new type of camera, of course, so perhaps comparing it to the current standard of cameras is doing it a disservice.

Will be interesting to see not only where this technology goes, but also the new directions artists will take it.