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

The limits of "computational photography"

yager.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 223 posts

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#81

Post by londons_explore »

wnkrshm wrote: post #69

There are many more clever methods that one can use with CMOS that fall under computational photography or optics. One very interesting one is ptychography (in microscopy often Fourier ptychography, since you can use Fourier optics to describe the optical system [0]), which uses a model of an optical system to get an image (iirc x7-x10 resolution) out of many blurry images, while knowing a bit about the optics in fro…

I think ptychography is the future of phone cameras... You'll see phones with 1000 lenses and 1000 CCD's, across the whole back of the phone.

They'll all be manufactured as a one piece glass moulding and single CCD chip - and the whole thing will be very cheap to make, having moved all the difficulty into software.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#82

Post by irthomasthomas »

delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #16

I would like to see computational photography applied to raw images from DSLRs and MILCs with APS-C and larger sensors. Perhaps Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Fujifilm could have built-in options in their cameras for ‘social media mode’, with a modicum of noise reduction (honestly unnecessary at ISOs lower than about 1600 for modern cameras), but drastically improved HDR and white balance. Many of these cameras are able to…

Most already offer that in their various automatic modes. We don't like it because whatever can be done computationally on a camera, can be done 10x better on a real computer with more hardware and finer controls.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#83

Post by _visgean »

SSLy wrote: post #67
buildbot wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no reason to do this. If you want to apply the algorithms and Iphone uses, simply take a burst and post process later for HDR or whatever. I remember being in middle school and messing around with Hugin and my Minolta bridge camera… People value quick shots/edits and don’t care about quality or editing things later don’t mind an iPhone doing all this behind the scene - but it is irreversible. The sort of err…

>camera manufacturers simply don’t have the same compute available. what forbids them from buying the competitive SoCs from Qualcomm? Pride?

i think the battery consumption is also quite bad.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#84

Post by rimliu »

jlarocco wrote: post #33
jack1243star wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As far as I know, iPhone and Android aren't doing anything that isn't already done by digital cameras. It's the opposite, most digital cameras aren't doing enough compared to smartphones, which have minimum control and look very good at 2M pixels. A proper camera with default settings looks bland in the hands of an amateur (too little saturation) and handles dynamic range poorly (without bracketing or post-processi…

I don't buy it. Which cameras have worse "Auto" settings than a phone? I have two Fujifilms, a Panasonic, and a Nikon, and they all take better photos on "Auto" than my iPhone or any of my friends' Androids. And who buys a camera in this day and age but doesn't want to play with the settings? Point and shoot users stick with their phones now.

Pretty much all of them are worse. Theres is no magic wrt to dynamic range on the DSLR (or mirrorless) so if camera does not HDR processing the result will be worse than smartphone's.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#85

Post by rimliu »

haswell wrote: post #19
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #16

I would like to see computational photography applied to raw images from DSLRs and MILCs with APS-C and larger sensors. Perhaps Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Fujifilm could have built-in options in their cameras for ‘social media mode’, with a modicum of noise reduction (honestly unnecessary at ISOs lower than about 1600 for modern cameras), but drastically improved HDR and white balance. Many of these cameras are able to…

I’d love to see this on “adventures” cameras like the Olympus OM-D line. This would also pair well with Fujifilm’s lineup which already includes camera features focused on in-camera processing.

I think Olympus was a pioneer at least in some aspects in computation photography. At least "live composite" and "focus stacking" were not very common at the time Olympus introduced them.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#86

Post by QuackyTheDuck »

nine_k wrote: post #78
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

as long as there is anything to key onto it's possible to remove the shake algorithmically

Maybe, but it looks like a problem of unscrambling an egg. The true image has been smeared over the sensor, superimposed on itself a bit. Maybe there is a good enough solution for the problem of finding the true image, but I can't imagine it to be computationally inexpensive.

This.

Even when you stabilize the footage afterwards (digitally, not by stabilizing the sensor), there will be motion blur due to the lower shutter speed.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#87

Post by rimliu »

softfalcon wrote: post #51
jlarocco wrote: post #20

I love my big, heavy Nikon DSLR, and there's really no comparing the images it takes with the ones from my iPhone. Especially in "tricky" lighting situations they're not even in the same ballpark. That said, there can be just as much (or more) "computational photography" going on with a digital camera as there is with a modern phone, the difference is that cameras and processing software give control to the user, and…

I also love my big heavy Canon DSLR. Can’t quite describe why it gives me so much joy, but I keep it around me at all times. I just love taking photos. The quality difference is also very obvious compared to my phone even though my camera is easily 8 years old.

I liked my not that big Nikons. Then I realised that I do not take as much photos as I could because I cannot be bothered to take camera and quite heavy 70-200/2.8 and 24-70/2.8 with me. And then I sold all my Nikon gear and instead of getting my dram D850 got myself Olympus. So happy I did this. Turns out you don't need FF and M4/3 has a gazzilion of excellent, small, and light-weight lenses available.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#88

Post by zirgs »

SSLy wrote: post #67
buildbot wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no reason to do this. If you want to apply the algorithms and Iphone uses, simply take a burst and post process later for HDR or whatever. I remember being in middle school and messing around with Hugin and my Minolta bridge camera… People value quick shots/edits and don’t care about quality or editing things later don’t mind an iPhone doing all this behind the scene - but it is irreversible. The sort of err…

>camera manufacturers simply don’t have the same compute available. what forbids them from buying the competitive SoCs from Qualcomm? Pride?

Power consumption is the main issue.

Software bloat is another. Current digital cameras start up and are ready to shoot almost instantly.

But it takes a while for a phone to boot up.

Photographers don't want that.

Re: The limits of "computational photography"

#90

Post by mtrycz2 »

dusted wrote: post #46
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #16

I would like to see computational photography applied to raw images from DSLRs and MILCs with APS-C and larger sensors. Perhaps Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Fujifilm could have built-in options in their cameras for ‘social media mode’, with a modicum of noise reduction (honestly unnecessary at ISOs lower than about 1600 for modern cameras), but drastically improved HDR and white balance. Many of these cameras are able to…

They already are. However, most photographers do not appreciate this type of distortion being applied to their images. At a glance, my samsung note 22 ultra takes better picture than my nikon d7500. At a glance. However, as soon as you want to actually DO anything to it, like, view it in any real detail, or on anything but a tiny screen, reality returns.. While the phone is absolutely fantastic for a quick snapshot,…

My old DSLR has a RAW+JPEG setting which will do both, I use it all the time.
Post reply on HN