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

Lytro Unlock – Making a bad camera slightly better

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 74 posts

Re: Lytro Unlock – Making a bad camera slightly better

#41

Post by PaulHoule »

Frost1x wrote: post #37
daniel_reetz wrote: post #30

Author, if you're reading, a really cool thing would be to create a small array of these cameras (4 of them) side by side. The very wide baseline should allow you to enhance/deepen the refocusing effect and create a wide format image. I've always wanted to do this.

You can also extract depth information from each cameras lens array. In theory, if you combine that capability on a per camera basis with photogrametric and/or stereo imaging techniques, you should be able to get a fairly refined depth map of a scene passively if the scene is static or you have well synchronized shots. Something I also wanted to explore but never had time to do. At the time, I always considered passi…

There is software to make point clouds and such from the Lytro

http://www.plenoptic.info/pages/software.html

I take stereograms with a Qoocam Ego, I have thought about getting a medium size Lytro, (the one that looks like a DSLR.)

Re: Lytro Unlock – Making a bad camera slightly better

#42

Post by ljf »

seszett wrote: post #20

I've been intrigued by this camera ever since it came out but I had not checked eBay for a long time so I was surprised to see "$20 to $40" mentioned there. Well, the cheapest one is actually $200 as far as I can see, showing results worldwide.

I saw one here in the UK at a carboot sale last year for £5 and I picked it up and chatted to the owner about it, but knew I had no need for it. On the way home I passed him again and he offered it to me for free, but I politely declined as I already horde enough stuff - so they are out there for a bargain, just need to get lucky I guess.

Re: Lytro Unlock – Making a bad camera slightly better

#43

Post by lostforwords »

matsemann wrote: post #31

> Killer feature of this new technology was the ability to refocus the image after it was taken! (...), the camera was trying to solve a problem that didn’t exist A related camera technology, but which I've found great to use, is 360 cameras. The ability to re-frame (not focus) the image as I want in post is so great. No longer do I have to spend many attempts positioning a camera perfect, just shoot and later "point…

I worked in scientific imaging and when Lytro came on the scene it showed a lot of promise. It brought the promise that we would be able to clearly capture and measure across multiple focal planes in a single image. Lytro focused on the consumer audience and never produced a product suitable to scientific imaging. You'll see Raytrix is still around in this space as they did embrace the scientific market.

Re: Lytro Unlock – Making a bad camera slightly better

#44

Post by daniel_reetz »

Frost1x wrote: post #37
daniel_reetz wrote: post #30

Author, if you're reading, a really cool thing would be to create a small array of these cameras (4 of them) side by side. The very wide baseline should allow you to enhance/deepen the refocusing effect and create a wide format image. I've always wanted to do this.

You can also extract depth information from each cameras lens array. In theory, if you combine that capability on a per camera basis with photogrametric and/or stereo imaging techniques, you should be able to get a fairly refined depth map of a scene passively if the scene is static or you have well synchronized shots. Something I also wanted to explore but never had time to do. At the time, I always considered passi…

My point was that the depth information increases with greater stereo baseline (distance between lytros in this case).

Depth maps from light fields were a topic Disney Research was publishing on while I was there. Great stuff, highly recommend checking out their siggraph paper.

Re: Lytro Unlock – Making a bad camera slightly better

#45

Post by birdman3131 »

seszett wrote: post #20

I've been intrigued by this camera ever since it came out but I had not checked eBay for a long time so I was surprised to see "$20 to $40" mentioned there. Well, the cheapest one is actually $200 as far as I can see, showing results worldwide.

Look in completeds. You can tell when this software became known. https://www.ebay.com/itm/144836103271 was one for cheap.

Re: Lytro Unlock – Making a bad camera slightly better

#46

Post by carlosdp »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #4

Ooooh I have an original Lytro and of course it just sits there. I am going to have to try this! By the way don't miss this video about the failed 755 megapixel 300fps Lytro Cinema camera, a contraption the size of a car with off the charts data storage requirements. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfjYecJHMRU

What's wild is that it turns out we were only a few years away from technology that could completely replace the purpose of the cinema camera, with off the shelf GPUs on a normal desktop (NeRFs)

Re: Lytro Unlock – Making a bad camera slightly better

#48

Post by IIAOPSW »

fhars wrote: post #35
ddalex wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going on a metaphysical tangent, it is a bit weird that A LOT of physical processes can be modelled with linear algebra, and don't require something way more advanced ...

That is actually deliberate, we tend to organize everyday life and the devices we build around processes that are easy to model, that is why many things look like linear processes and harmonic oscillators (the first two term of the Taylor expansion of the actual behavior). We change the type of spring we use if the current one starts to wear out early under normal operational conditions.

Let me rephrase on his behalf. Isn't it curious just how unreasonably capable our math is at expressing those physical laws of the universe to which we did not invent.

Re: Lytro Unlock – Making a bad camera slightly better

#50

Post by dylan604 »

ideashower wrote: post #9
obamallama wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the human retinal density was equal to the foveal density across the whole eye, our optic nerves would be half a foot across. And if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a bicycle. In short: pay attention or get left behind.

The whole segment never fails to crack me up on a bad day: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OplyHCIBmfE

holyjeebuschristo!!!

i have no idea who any of these people are, but i absolutely am in tears over this. the expression on his face at the mere suggestion of "if it had ham", but then she kept going with it, and his reaction. ohmugawd!! but it all started with "you're doing it wrong" flat out, not soft coating it, nothing. ahhhh

Post reply on HN