4 ms·
One difference may be that, as I recall, Lytro was focused on (2D) photography, while this seems to be targeting 3D, which may be a much more compelling applica
by tgflynn 4y ago
One difference may be that, as I recall, Lytro was focused on (2D) photography, while this seems to be targeting 3D, which may be a much more compelling application.
- NovemberWhiskey 4y agoI don't know - it seems pretty much the same - the whole point of the Lytro camera was that you had sufficient information in the recorded image to select your point of focus and depth in post-processing, which is essentially the same as having depth data.
- tgflynn 4y agoThe same information is used but there's a big difference between using it to make prettier photos versus reconstructing 3D scenes. The second application domain seems to have much more potential for revolutionary change than the first (to me at least). The average person, or probably even the average VC, isn't going to read a pitch about being able to take photos without having to adjust lens focus and say "gee, with that technology you could build a 3D model as easily as taking a photo".