6 ms·

Mindblowing that this technique is patentable

by acchow 4y ago

int0x2e 4y ago
Until tested in court, many, many things are patentable...
- JacobThreeThree 4y ago
  It's been tested in court. https://www.engadget.com/2019-11-11-apple-prores-raw-red-patent-dispute.html https://www.engadget.com/2019-11-11-apple-prores-raw-red-pat... Major patent reform is required.
  - ryandamm 4y ago
    We actually have had major patent reform! Look into IPR review, the Alice Supreme Court decision, and the patent reform act of ... was it 2012? 2013? The IP landscape is wildly different than it was when these patents were first filed. That they've held up under scrutiny implies they're not _total_ junk. Also, it probably still needs reform. But my understanding from talking to lawyers (who I was paying, to be fair), it's better than it was.
  - rasz 4y ago
    Apple is really good at losing patent cases in court, even when someone sues using a patent copied verbatim from Apple itself (S3TC - road pizza video codec)
ryandamm 4y ago
Keep in mind that video cameras of that era were mostly not bayer pattern sensors, at least for professional television cameras. They were three, full raster sensors, typically with an interference-based prism block shunting blue, green, and red light to different sensors. These were so-called "three chip" cameras, the optics of which dates back to analog cameras that used tubes. Bayer pattern sensors were more common in DSLRs, because they were an extension of 35mm film, and you had to have a single, flat imaging device to work with film optics. In the film industry, the only digital cameras were the Sony F900 series (iirc) which I believe had the three-chip design, the Thomson Viper (again, memory foggy), and maybe the Panasonic Varicam... I don't know if the Viper or Varicam were single sensor, but they evidently weren't Bayer pattern or didn't compress the Bayer pattern. (I think at least one had RGB stripe layout, which is just inherently inferior.) So yeah, it's obvious now. But it was patentable then, because nobody (or very few) had ever made a Bayer pattern sensor for a video camera. It's easy to forget how long ago 2007 was, at least until I try to get out of bed in the mornings.
- NonNefarious 4y ago
  There were Bayer sensors before Red. If I remember correctly, three-chip cameras became impractical at higher resolutions because of the focusing problems that resulted from refraction. Red, green, and blue wavelengths refract at different rates... which was a problem when they're all coming through the same lens. I don't remember details beyond that.
  - ryandamm 4y ago
    I think it had more to do with the requirement that three chip camera lenses be telecentric (see my earlier comment). Tends to make worse lenses that are more expensive.
- NegativeLatency 4y ago
  There's a good wikipedia page for anyone interested in how the 3 sensors were implemented: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-CCD_camera https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-CCD_camera
  - formerly_proven 4y ago
    There's a fascinating detail about 3CCD/3CMOS that's not mentioned in that article, namely that the sensors aren't actually in the same plane, but slightly offset in depth (probably because of the filter films between the prisms). Broadcast lenses are specifically corrected for being either 3CCD or 1CCD, the former having a back-focal distance that varies with wavelength, so that red is focused in the red's sensor plane and so on. You cannot reasonably use one kind of lens on the other kind of system. Almost all broadcast lenses that shore up on eBay are for 3CCD - so they're pretty useless for use with "normal" small-format cameras, even if their specs are otherwise enticing.
    - ryandamm 4y ago
      Yeah, they used telecentric lenses; for the prism block to work properly, you have to have each principal ray across the lens perpendicular to the filter. This puts very rough optical constraints on the lens; a typical video camera lens would have dozens of elements arranged in many groups, while an equivalent 'cine' lens might have half or fewer elements. And on top of that, the lenses produced ugly images. Going to single chip designs was a big upgrade in image quality, mostly for optical reasons.
teawrecks 4y ago
Seriously. I zip my raw files for storage on my NAS. Would that be an infringement?

Mindblowing that this technique is patentable

by acchow 4y ago

Mindblowing that this technique is patentable

int0x2e 4y ago

Until tested in court, many, many things are patentable...

JacobThreeThree 4y ago
It's been tested in court. https://www.engadget.com/2019-11-11-apple-prores-raw-red-patent-dispute.html https://www.engadget.com/2019-11-11-apple-prores-raw-red-pat... Major patent reform is required.
- ryandamm 4y ago
  We actually have had major patent reform! Look into IPR review, the Alice Supreme Court decision, and the patent reform act of ... was it 2012? 2013? The IP landscape is wildly different than it was when these patents were first filed. That they've held up under scrutiny implies they're not _total_ junk. Also, it probably still needs reform. But my understanding from talking to lawyers (who I was paying, to be fair), it's better than it was.
- rasz 4y ago
  Apple is really good at losing patent cases in court, even when someone sues using a patent copied verbatim from Apple itself (S3TC - road pizza video codec)

ryandamm 4y ago

Keep in mind that video cameras of that era were mostly not bayer pattern sensors, at least for professional television cameras. They were three, full raster sensors, typically with an interference-based prism block shunting blue, green, and red light to different sensors. These were so-called "three chip" cameras, the optics of which dates back to analog cameras that used tubes. Bayer pattern sensors were more common in DSLRs, because they were an extension of 35mm film, and you had to have a single, flat imaging device to work with film optics. In the film industry, the only digital cameras were the Sony F900 series (iirc) which I believe had the three-chip design, the Thomson Viper (again, memory foggy), and maybe the Panasonic Varicam... I don't know if the Viper or Varicam were single sensor, but they evidently weren't Bayer pattern or didn't compress the Bayer pattern. (I think at least one had RGB stripe layout, which is just inherently inferior.) So yeah, it's obvious now. But it was patentable then, because nobody (or very few) had ever made a Bayer pattern sensor for a video camera. It's easy to forget how long ago 2007 was, at least until I try to get out of bed in the mornings.

NonNefarious 4y ago
There were Bayer sensors before Red. If I remember correctly, three-chip cameras became impractical at higher resolutions because of the focusing problems that resulted from refraction. Red, green, and blue wavelengths refract at different rates... which was a problem when they're all coming through the same lens. I don't remember details beyond that.
- ryandamm 4y ago
  I think it had more to do with the requirement that three chip camera lenses be telecentric (see my earlier comment). Tends to make worse lenses that are more expensive.
NegativeLatency 4y ago
There's a good wikipedia page for anyone interested in how the 3 sensors were implemented: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-CCD_camera https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-CCD_camera
- formerly_proven 4y ago
  There's a fascinating detail about 3CCD/3CMOS that's not mentioned in that article, namely that the sensors aren't actually in the same plane, but slightly offset in depth (probably because of the filter films between the prisms). Broadcast lenses are specifically corrected for being either 3CCD or 1CCD, the former having a back-focal distance that varies with wavelength, so that red is focused in the red's sensor plane and so on. You cannot reasonably use one kind of lens on the other kind of system. Almost all broadcast lenses that shore up on eBay are for 3CCD - so they're pretty useless for use with "normal" small-format cameras, even if their specs are otherwise enticing.
  - ryandamm 4y ago
    Yeah, they used telecentric lenses; for the prism block to work properly, you have to have each principal ray across the lens perpendicular to the filter. This puts very rough optical constraints on the lens; a typical video camera lens would have dozens of elements arranged in many groups, while an equivalent 'cine' lens might have half or fewer elements. And on top of that, the lenses produced ugly images. Going to single chip designs was a big upgrade in image quality, mostly for optical reasons.

teawrecks 4y ago

Seriously. I zip my raw files for storage on my NAS. Would that be an infringement?