3 ms·
Lytro could have changed photography, but they went with an optics system that was about 6" too small in diameter. It needed to be something big and clunky, but
by mikewarot 3y ago
Lytro could have changed photography, but they went with an optics system that was about 6" too small in diameter. It needed to be something big and clunky, but capable of doing amazing things with the captured light fields. There wasn't enough change of perspective across the lens to be useful at the form factor they chose.
- IanCal 3y agoYou might be interested in it's bigger sibling, the 40k 11ft cinema camera https://www.lightfieldlab.com/blogposts/the-promise-of-light-field-cinematography https://www.lightfieldlab.com/blogposts/the-promise-of-light... I can't find a specific link to one I've seen but there's some great videos about this truly insane bit of tech.
- mikewarot 3y agoI've made images with a virtual light field bigger than that.. focus is incredibly short, which is awesome. These 2 images were derived from the same set of photos taken about 2 blocks away from the subjects in Chicago https://flic.kr/p/2n1uYqj https://flic.kr/p/2n1AhXa In this case the virtual aperture was about 20 feet. For most subjects 1 foot is more appropriate. It's a time intensive process, but cost nothing otherwise.
- consumer451 3y agoBased on my quick reading of TFA, an iPhone 15 Pro uses two sensors very close together for 3D, and the wide angle lens lowers the res to 1080p. I wonder if as a kludge, we will see a 3rd party app and dual iPhone holder which then creates a single 3D video/image, allowing more human-like pupillary distance at 8k from the two main sensors.