3 ms·

For the same price, a video (or a still from a video) doesn't look nearly as good as a photo. The development here is packaging a high-quality still inside a vi

For the same price, a video (or a still from a video) doesn't look nearly as good as a photo. The development here is packaging a high-quality still inside a video and doing compression in a way that doesn't kill the photo. Think about it - why do professional photographers bother with shutters or try to time the perfect shots? Why not just constantly shoot video and pull frames out of it later? Because it would look like crap. This wouldn't be hard to imitate. Record the live preview into a 3 second buffer. When the user presses the shutter, switch into still mode, take a real photo, wait 1.5 seconds, and then write both the buffer and the photo into the same archive. On playback, by default show the normal photo, but on whatever UI gesture, play the first 1.5 seconds of the video, then the photo for one frame, then the next 1.5 seconds of the video. Only barrier I could see to re-implementing this on other phones is long wait times while the camera switches modes, during which information is lost.

firloop 11y ago
>[W]hy do professional photographers bother with shutters or try to time the perfect shots? Why not just constantly shoot video and pull frames out of it later? Photographers are doing this. https://news.creativecow.net/story/879117 https://news.creativecow.net/story/879117 >"RED cameras allow Inez and Vinoodh to simultaneously capture high-resolution images for their photographs along with their artistic videos"
- superuser2 11y ago
  An entry-level RED (Scarlet Dragon) is $16k. A top-end Nikon (D3X) is $8k. You can get to comparable image quality, but it's going to cost you.
devindotcom 11y ago
I'm not suggesting people should take videos instead of photos. It was just ridiculous the way they trotted it out as a brand new and of course revolutionary idea, considering it has been done before and also is just video taken simultaneously with stills, something camcorders have done for a decade.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

firloop 11y ago

>[W]hy do professional photographers bother with shutters or try to time the perfect shots? Why not just constantly shoot video and pull frames out of it later? Photographers are doing this. https://news.creativecow.net/story/879117 https://news.creativecow.net/story/879117 >"RED cameras allow Inez and Vinoodh to simultaneously capture high-resolution images for their photographs along with their artistic videos"

superuser2 11y ago
An entry-level RED (Scarlet Dragon) is $16k. A top-end Nikon (D3X) is $8k. You can get to comparable image quality, but it's going to cost you.

devindotcom 11y ago

I'm not suggesting people should take videos instead of photos. It was just ridiculous the way they trotted it out as a brand new and of course revolutionary idea, considering it has been done before and also is just video taken simultaneously with stills, something camcorders have done for a decade.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]