Good luck capturing a sprint finish with that kind of camera.
A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography
301–310 of 414 posts
Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography
#302Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No photographer thinks images the they get on film are perfect reflections of reality. The lens itself introduces flaws/changes as does film and developing. Don't fall into this trap. A lens and computational photography are not alike . One is a static filter, doing simple(ish) transformation of incoming light. The other is arbitrary computation operating in semantic space , halfway between photography and generati…
Yeah, computational photography is actually closer to Terry Pratchet’s Discworld version of a camera - a box with an imp who paints the picture. Artistic interpretation of a scene is often very nice. But we would really need to be able to discern cameras that give you the pixels from the ccd from the irreversible kind. In the worst case scenario it’s back to photographic film if you want to be sure no-one is molestin…
I kinda like that scenario!
Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography
#303Earlier quoted context omitted.
It won’t happen in direct sunlight, and yeah, I will definitely take it over not having that picture in a presentable state. How is that different than creating a panorama photo?
Panoramas are mostly taken of static scenes or at least with the knowledge that it's going to mess things up if people move around. Regular photographs are generally both taken and viewed with the assumption that all the things in it happened at the same time (modulo shutter speed).
Modulo now in low-light, moving scenes you actually get a decent photo. It doesn’t happen in good lighting, and this whole article is bullshit.
Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography
#304Purists will always hate the idea of computational photography, but I love how well my iPhone captures handheld nighttime, low-light, and motion images. I’ve captured some photos at night that I never would have thought possible from a physically small sensor due to the laws of physics. Is it 100% pixel perfect to what was happening at the time? No, but I also don’t care. I’ve used HDR exposure stacking in the past.…
How many "purists" are there in the wild ? I'd only see police and insurance agents needing pixel perfect depiction of reality as it's out of the sensor. Photography as an art was never about purity, and I think most of us want photos that reflect what we see and how we see it, and will take the technical steps to get that rendered. If the moon is beautiful and gently lights the landscape, I want a photo with both th…
I think the police/insurance topic will be a big deal soon. I still remember the first building inspectors walking around with digital cameras, and of course when smartphones with "good enough" cameras came they started using these...
Now if society (including the courts) learn that the photos might not reflect reality, photo "evidence" could face issues being accepted by courts...
Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography
#305Purists will always hate the idea of computational photography, but I love how well my iPhone captures handheld nighttime, low-light, and motion images. I’ve captured some photos at night that I never would have thought possible from a physically small sensor due to the laws of physics. Is it 100% pixel perfect to what was happening at the time? No, but I also don’t care. I’ve used HDR exposure stacking in the past.…
> Is it 100% pixel perfect to what was happening at the time? No, but I also don’t care. No photographer thinks images the they get on film are perfect reflections of reality. The lens itself introduces flaws/changes as does film and developing. You don't have to be a purist to want the ability to decide what gets captured or to have control over how it looks though. Those kinds of choices are part of what make photo…
> No photographer thinks images the they get on film are perfect reflections of reality.
More importantly than that: framing, exposure, aperture choices by anyone not simply shooting with their camera in the Auto mode.
* https://petapixel.com/digital-camera-modes-a-complete-guide/...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_dial
* https://photographylife.com/understanding-digital-camera-mod...
Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography
#306[deleted]
Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography
#307I had a related experience with my Pixel 7 a few months ago. In this picture of a deer: https://photos.app.goo.gl/qChwaw9C29WVdAmr6 If you zoom in, you'll note that .. everything at a detail level looks like an oil painting, especially the deer's face and the wall behind it. Very weird effect, and that's certainly not what the wall or deer actually look like. No filters applied. Computational photography is really aw…
That’s denoising. Those mosaic like patterns are more pleasing to the eye than a noisy photograph. The laws of physics put a limit on how well a tiny phone lens and sensor can capture light. We’re not at the limit yet even though hardware is quite good. Still, you wouldn’t like if your phone spat out raw, noisy images everywhere without any processing (beyond what’s necessary to translate it to the right pixel grid a…
These patterns more pleasing? Not to me.
Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography
#308Good luck capturing a sprint finish with that kind of camera.
The photo shows they all ran over the line at the same time!
Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography
#309Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No photographer thinks images the they get on film are perfect reflections of reality. The lens itself introduces flaws/changes as does film and developing. Don't fall into this trap. A lens and computational photography are not alike . One is a static filter, doing simple(ish) transformation of incoming light. The other is arbitrary computation operating in semantic space , halfway between photography and generati…
Yeah, computational photography is actually closer to Terry Pratchet’s Discworld version of a camera - a box with an imp who paints the picture. Artistic interpretation of a scene is often very nice. But we would really need to be able to discern cameras that give you the pixels from the ccd from the irreversible kind. In the worst case scenario it’s back to photographic film if you want to be sure no-one is molestin…
> Yeah, computational photography is actually closer to Terry Pratchet’s Discworld version of a camera - a box with an imp who paints the picture.
I mean… you’ve pretty much described our brain. Your blue isn’t my blue.
People need to stop clutching pearls. For the scenario it is used in, computational photography is nothing short of magic.
> In the worst case scenario it’s back to photographic film if you want to be sure no-one is molesting the data :D
Apple already gives you an optional step back with ProLog. Perhaps in the feature they’ll just send the “raw” sensor data, for those that really want it.
Re: A reality bending mistake in Apple's computational photography
#310With how much manipulation happens to photos by default it seems like it would be easier to get them thrown out of court as evidence
Without better evidence, the court will keep accepting them. Just look at how bad fingerprints are accepted
I'd say, the courts will keep accepting bad evidence no matter what you do.