The state of the art in computational photography is incredible

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
12,018
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
#1

KIPAX

Seriously Likeable
Messages
20,122
Name
KIPAX
Edit My Images
Yes
#2
... and it's only going to get better, given the vast R&D budgets of companies like Google and Apple.

Thanks to @HoppyUK for finding this article, and I thought it deserved a wider audience that it was likely to get where he posted it (in a discussion about variable ISO sensors):

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7921074499/five-ways-google-pixel-3-pushes-the-boundaries-of-computational-photography

Am about half way through and it seems to me all the extra bits, new innovations? are aimed at people who can't take a decent photo and the camera fixes it for you...
 
Messages
22,918
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#5
... and it's only going to get better, given the vast R&D budgets of companies like Google and Apple.

Thanks to @HoppyUK for finding this article, and I thought it deserved a wider audience that it was likely to get where he posted it (in a discussion about variable ISO sensors):

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7921074499/five-ways-google-pixel-3-pushes-the-boundaries-of-computational-photography
Cheers Stewart :) DPReview also video'd that interview and have now put it up here
https://www.dpreview.com/videos/5389410276/google-pixel-3-camera-feature-deep-dive

There is no doubt that this is the new revolution in photography (mirrorless is just a minor divertion). It's as significant and 'disruptive' as the basic phone camera has already been to mass market photography, and now this new tech seriously threatens the enthusiast end - whether we like it or not. And it's advancing fast - we've seen nothing yet :eek:

Am about half way through and it seems to me all the extra bits, new innovations? are aimed at people who can't take a decent photo and the camera fixes it for you...
What's not to like about that? Well, nothing for the 'greater good' but personally I hate the way that the knowledge and skills (and equipment) I've acquired over the last few decades are being increasingly eroded.

That would be useful for 98% of the people who own cameras and smart phones then!
Exactly.
 
Messages
698
Edit My Images
Yes
#6
There is no doubt that this is the new revolution in photography (mirrorless is just a minor divertion). It's as significant and 'disruptive' as the basic phone camera has already been to mass market photography, and now this new tech seriously threatens the enthusiast end - whether we like it or not. And it's advancing fast - we've seen nothing yet :eek:
Totally agree, they have pretty much seen off most the compact market and starting to nibble at the entry level market. Will I be getting rid of my A7iii? No, but I do use my phone much more as it's just more convenient and image quality is more than good enough.
 
Messages
4,840
Edit My Images
Yes
#7
...but personally I hate the way that the knowledge and skills (and equipment) I've acquired over the last few decades are being increasingly eroded.
Unfortunately throughout history the superior technology has usually supplanted the inferior.

Which is why we now have the internet, cameras in smartphones, USB 3 etc etc.

But there will always be room for the truly great in any sphere.
 
OP
OP
StewartR

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
12,018
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
#8
Will I be getting rid of my A7iii? No, but I do use my phone much more as it's just more convenient and image quality is more than good enough.
Phone camera "convenient"? I guess it is, so long as you're not trying to take pictures on a sunny day. That's the bug bear for me.
 
Messages
1,921
Name
Roger
Edit My Images
Yes
#10
The technology is incredible, for me though investing £700 in a phone is simply too much. My phones get abused and rarely last a year!

I do look forward to a couple of years time when I can buy this type of phone for a couple of hundred quid.

But as has been mentioned what destroys camera phones for me is the lack of a viewfinder. Are there any indications phone companies are developing tech to get around this?
 
Messages
499
Name
Kev
Edit My Images
Yes
#11
Am about half way through and it seems to me all the extra bits, new innovations? are aimed at people who can't take a decent photo and the camera fixes it for you...
you mean, the same reason why people buy 35mm sensors and fast primes?
 
Messages
140
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
Yes
#12
Wonder how long before computational photography can pull this off?

(Yeah, why would it want to etc etc)

View attachment 136500
You mean replicate the bokeh blur? Can't see why they couldn't do that already on high resolution pictures. Computers already compare neighboring pixels to alter pictures.

Selective sharpening/unsharpening could allow you to replicate a f/1.4 lens with a f/4- saving you from buying a £1000+ lens (so you can instead buy £200 software, haha). More importantly, any lens at f/4 may make sharper pictures than f/1.4, so you get a better overall effect.

On a smartphone it wouldn't work- they would have to use face detection and scene recognition to create out of focus backgrounds.
 
Messages
452
Name
Lindsay
Edit My Images
Yes
#13
The thing is, when things become easy and purchaseable, they lose value. As a result they are taken for granted and become less desirable, accelerating the loss of value. Until the point where it becomes niche and then acquires rarity or curiosity value. Keynesian economics. Hence why we now pay a lot for handcrafted items that could be purchased for pence if machine-created, but we perceive the value that is added (never mind the quality) by the effort of the craftsperson.

Of course that is a very middle-class wealthy southerner view.
 
Messages
22,918
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#14
You mean replicate the bokeh blur? Can't see why they couldn't do that already on high resolution pictures. Computers already compare neighboring pixels to alter pictures.

Selective sharpening/unsharpening could allow you to replicate a f/1.4 lens with a f/4- saving you from buying a £1000+ lens (so you can instead buy £200 software, haha). More importantly, any lens at f/4 may make sharper pictures than f/1.4, so you get a better overall effect.

On a smartphone it wouldn't work- they would have to use face detection and scene recognition to create out of focus backgrounds.
You're a bit behind the curve of what's already happening with smartphones.
 
Messages
22,918
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#15
The thing is, when things become easy and purchaseable, they lose value. As a result they are taken for granted and become less desirable, accelerating the loss of value. Until the point where it becomes niche and then acquires rarity or curiosity value. Keynesian economics. Hence why we now pay a lot for handcrafted items that could be purchased for pence if machine-created, but we perceive the value that is added (never mind the quality) by the effort of the craftsperson.

Of course that is a very middle-class wealthy southerner view.
That's exactly what's happened to professional photography - technology has all but wiped it out as a viable career beyond a few niche areas.
 
Top