Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Roc Camera

roc.camera

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 491 posts

Re: Roc Camera

#211

Post by HelloUsername »

jeswin wrote: post #186
HelloUsername wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a market for a well made camera like the Fuji X-Half. That product has for its specs a ridiculous price point of €750..

But you don't buy it for the specs, you buy it for the experience. It topped sales charts when it was launched. If I had more time to spend on photography, or if I was younger, or if it was a little cheaper I'd have bought it myself. I suspect more will follow the X-Half, because it gets orientation right. Most images are viewed today in portrait mode, and half-frame is the right format for that.

> if it was a little cheaper I'd have bought it myself.

Same here. Even for the experience it's overpriced.

Re: Roc Camera

#213

Post by bborud »

barrell wrote: post #120
peteforde wrote: post #62

I used to be really (really really) into photography. I respect anyone working hard on a physical product, but this misses the mark on every front I can think of. The real issue that photographers grapple with, emotionally and financially, is that pictures have become so thoroughly commodified that nobody assigns them cultural value anymore. They are the thumbnail you see before the short video clip starts playing. N…

I also used to be really (really really) into photography. Personally, I’ve stopped taking pictures because of the stigma around a camera. Everyone, me more than most, doesn’t want their picture taken, or to be in the background of other photos. When someone can take thousands of pictures an hour, and upload them all to some social media site to be permanently stored… idk it’s shifted from a way to capture a moment t…

The concept of «public» has changed.

About 15-20 years ago I attended a lot of car events (races, shows) where I took lots of photos. Mostly of moving cars, but also a lot of closeups of race car drivers using a long lens. For about a year more than half the photos published in a very niche car publication were by me. The magazine had a few thousand subscribers. And to this day I still see some drivers use my shots of them as profile pictures etc. Nobody minded being photographed. In fact, they were really happy about it.

Then social media happened. There’s a different «public» now. Any picture taken and published now has the potential to go viral. To get a global audience. And not least: to be put in unpleasant contexts.

I can understand that people’s attitudes have changed.

I haven’t actually given up taking photos in public. In part because I think it is important that people do. I still take pictures of strangers. Then again, I very rarely publish them online out of respect for their privacy.

I understand how photos represent something else today. And that people view the act of taking a picture differently. But if we stop taking pictures, stop exercising our rights to take pictures, we will lose them. Through a process of erosion.

Re: Roc Camera

#214

Post by 7952 »

modeless wrote: post #31

Seems to me that a camera like this is necessarily, at least in part, a closed system that blocks you from controlling the software or hardware on the device you supposedly own. It's hard for me to think this is a good direction. And as others have pointed out, it can't prevent attacks through the analog hole, e.g. photographing a display. It's not feasible or desirable for our hardware devices to verify the informat…

Practically I think there are situations where it is not so black and white. Like camera footage used as evidence in a court case. Signing a video with a public key would give some way to verify the source and chain of custody. Why wouldn't you in that situation? At a minimum it makes tapering harder and weakens false claims that something has been tampered with.

Re: Roc Camera

#215

Post by assimpleaspossi »

barrell wrote: post #120
peteforde wrote: post #62

I used to be really (really really) into photography. I respect anyone working hard on a physical product, but this misses the mark on every front I can think of. The real issue that photographers grapple with, emotionally and financially, is that pictures have become so thoroughly commodified that nobody assigns them cultural value anymore. They are the thumbnail you see before the short video clip starts playing. N…

I also used to be really (really really) into photography. Personally, I’ve stopped taking pictures because of the stigma around a camera. Everyone, me more than most, doesn’t want their picture taken, or to be in the background of other photos. When someone can take thousands of pictures an hour, and upload them all to some social media site to be permanently stored… idk it’s shifted from a way to capture a moment t…

People feel like there's some man in a dark room somewhere looking at each and every image posted everywhere with evil intent.

Re: Roc Camera

#216

Post by dbdr »

dimas_codes wrote: post #144

I am sorry if I missed something or someone already asked it, but: If I generate image with AI, print it, then take a photo of it with Roc Camera so that you can't tell that this is actually a printed image, I will then have an AI image with ZKP of its authenticity?

Sony has this on their related page:

> A digital signature alone cannot determine whether the captured image is of an actual 3D subject, or of an image or video projected on a high-definition monitor. However, by using metadata including 3D depth information, it is possible to verify the authenticity of images with a high degree of accuracy. By using cameras from Sony, both the image and the 3D depth information can be captured on the sensor along the single light axis, providing information of high authenticity.

That 3D depth data could presumably be used to detect this. In principle, you could also train an AI to generate realistic 3D data. It's just not available yet, and probably harder to train (in general, and also since you would need to collect new massive amount of training data first).

No idea if this specific device has a 3D sensor, addressing the general question.

Re: Roc Camera

#217

Post by bborud »

ben_ wrote: post #192
sjw987 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's odd, and to reassure you I would say that I personally would rather see somebody with a physical camera. That way I know I can avoid the area they're photographing if I don't want to be shot or just be aware I'm going to be in a photo otherwise. It also makes me (rightly or wrongly) think the photo will be uploaded somewhere a bit higher than an Instagram / Facebook feed (my wife used to put DSLR photos on Ins…

> for an image feed website I used to be shocked at how poorly images were downscaled, maybe that's changed It has not, still garbage.

Which can be a blessing in disguise. It makes it less attractive to steal images for commercial purposes.

Re: Roc Camera

#218

Post by assimpleaspossi »

barrell wrote: post #120
peteforde wrote: post #62

I used to be really (really really) into photography. I respect anyone working hard on a physical product, but this misses the mark on every front I can think of. The real issue that photographers grapple with, emotionally and financially, is that pictures have become so thoroughly commodified that nobody assigns them cultural value anymore. They are the thumbnail you see before the short video clip starts playing. N…

I also used to be really (really really) into photography. Personally, I’ve stopped taking pictures because of the stigma around a camera. Everyone, me more than most, doesn’t want their picture taken, or to be in the background of other photos. When someone can take thousands of pictures an hour, and upload them all to some social media site to be permanently stored… idk it’s shifted from a way to capture a moment t…

People feel like there's some man in a dark room somewhere looking at each and every image posted everywhere with evil intent.

A friend of mine delivers for Amazon. They have to take pictures of every package delivered. Sometimes the customer is there when they arrive and he asks them to hold the package for him while he takes the photo of the package.

Most of them turn away or hold the package far away so they aren't in the image. Some will pose with the package in some amusing way.

Re: Roc Camera

#219

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

Tepix wrote: post #154
MarcelOlsz wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't you just not care and power through? Someones always going to be miffed regardless. I keep a Rollei A110 on me at all times and a tiny Minox EC that takes me hours to refill. When I bring it out people love it. It's a throwback that people very much appreciate. I can see people getting miffed at a big digital camera though.

Why do you think anyone is entitled to upload photographs showing other people to the internet where they are completely out of control of what happens next?

Because that's what public space is? We've always held that principle, and I don't think 'reach' should affect that. If someone takes this to the extreme (i.e. follows you around in public, taking thousands of pictures and uploading them in real time) they can be charged with stalking, harassment, or a similar offence.

To turn it on its head, if you cannot take photographs of people in public without their permission, then we basically lose the ability to take any photos of public space.

Post reply on HN