3 ms·

I wonder why traditional camera manufacturers have been so reluctant to leverage the advances in computational photography that the mobile phone world has embra

by dagw 7y ago

I wonder why traditional camera manufacturers have been so reluctant to leverage the advances in computational photography that the mobile phone world has embraced. I mean I get why they want to have neutral default settings for people who want to do their own editing, but why are their 'scene' settings so crap when compared to mobile phones. Is it simply because they're worried that a sufficiently powerful processor is going to draw too much power?

willis936 7y ago
Conservative management. What happens to those who don’t swim?
- fock 7y ago
  I'm into taking photos to craft an image of reality. Myself. I couldn't care less for any AI crafting it's image of typical reality for me. I think that's quite set for anyone taking pictures for fun vs. admoney/instafame/...
  - ansgri 7y ago
    There's still such thing as physically correct image reconstruction, i.e. removing technical limitations via computational means. Super-resolution, focus stacking, HDR (proper one, without fake colors), highlight color preservation (try to photograph light source while preserving color while not underexposing everything around). Basically, make images that are currently possible on $3000+ hardware, on $600 hardware. There's also such thing as perceptually correct image rendering, but that's a whole another can of worms (image appearance models and the like), it isn't scientifically ready just yet.
    - fock 7y ago
      And you can do all of this with an ILC too and will profit from the fact that it has far less technical limitations. Basically most of the really "cool" applications center around using the electronic shutter which up to 2-3years ago none of the ILC-companies dared to offer for the masses because it has some shortcomings which the "hey I can finally shoot in the dark"-crowd might not notice/care about, but people buying an ILC will, even if they're not technical enough to understand that it's their own problem...
      - ansgri 7y ago
        I was talking of compact ILCs specifically, that they would profit from this to become comparable with bulky 'pro' gear.
        fock 7y ago
        ah, but then if you look at µ4/3 it's already there (6k/30fps bursts with the electronic shutter for selection afterwards, pixelshift to improve resolution, ...)
KineticLensman 7y ago
I can't speak for the manufacturers but as a DLSR user I love the total predictability (exposure, DoF, focus, etc) when it is in manual mode. I really don't want the camera to try to anticipate the type of picture I am aiming for. This totally applies to scenes. Portrait, sports, landscape, etc are all just different permutations of shutter speed, aperture and ISO.

by dagw 7y ago

willis936 7y ago

Conservative management. What happens to those who don’t swim?

fock 7y ago
I'm into taking photos to craft an image of reality. Myself. I couldn't care less for any AI crafting it's image of typical reality for me. I think that's quite set for anyone taking pictures for fun vs. admoney/instafame/...
- ansgri 7y ago
  There's still such thing as physically correct image reconstruction, i.e. removing technical limitations via computational means. Super-resolution, focus stacking, HDR (proper one, without fake colors), highlight color preservation (try to photograph light source while preserving color while not underexposing everything around). Basically, make images that are currently possible on $3000+ hardware, on $600 hardware. There's also such thing as perceptually correct image rendering, but that's a whole another can of worms (image appearance models and the like), it isn't scientifically ready just yet.
  - fock 7y ago
    And you can do all of this with an ILC too and will profit from the fact that it has far less technical limitations. Basically most of the really "cool" applications center around using the electronic shutter which up to 2-3years ago none of the ILC-companies dared to offer for the masses because it has some shortcomings which the "hey I can finally shoot in the dark"-crowd might not notice/care about, but people buying an ILC will, even if they're not technical enough to understand that it's their own problem...
    - ansgri 7y ago
      I was talking of compact ILCs specifically, that they would profit from this to become comparable with bulky 'pro' gear.
      - fock 7y ago
        ah, but then if you look at µ4/3 it's already there (6k/30fps bursts with the electronic shutter for selection afterwards, pixelshift to improve resolution, ...)

KineticLensman 7y ago

I can't speak for the manufacturers but as a DLSR user I love the total predictability (exposure, DoF, focus, etc) when it is in manual mode. I really don't want the camera to try to anticipate the type of picture I am aiming for. This totally applies to scenes. Portrait, sports, landscape, etc are all just different permutations of shutter speed, aperture and ISO.