Lightfield cameras capture the
entire photonic information of a scene with essentially infinite depth of field, meaning that pictures can be focused
after the photo is taken, and low-light conditions do not require a flash. Lightfield images are also “3D” without the need for stereo lenses.
Lightfield (aka “plenoptic”) technology was developed in the 90's: the first working prototype required dozens of separate cameras and a supercomputer.
Professional plenoptic cameras have been available for the past year; the
Lytro startup intends to release a consumer-ready shirt-pocket lightfield camera later this year.
[more inside]
posted by Bora Horza Gobuchul
on Jun 22, 2011 -
54 comments
The "Brown Stabilizer" - better known as a
Steadicam - had its
first commercial use 35 years ago in
Bound for Glory, Hal Ashby's biopic of Woody Guthrie. Later that year, it was used to film the
iconic shot of Rocky Balboa running up the steps of the Philadelphia Museum of Art. But it was
this shot in
The Shining - which even Kubrick-hater Pauline Kael deemed "spectacular" - that showed the technology's full potential.
(previously)
posted by Joe Beese
on Jan 16, 2011 -
41 comments
DSLR News Shooter is a new photo site featuring the use of the latest HD-dSLRs like the Canon Eos5DmkII, 7D and Nikon D300s for news, documentary and factual shooting. By Guardian news photographer
Dan Chung, it's a place for professionals, educators, students and industry figures to discuss the practice and the art of cinematic photography in documenting the real world. For example, the time-lapse and slow-motion film of the recent
60th anniversary parade of the PRC. Other places to look for information and discussion of DSLR video are the
Planet5D blog, and filmmakers such as
Vincent Laforet and
Phillip Bloom. (previous
1,
2)
posted by netbros
on Oct 7, 2009 -
32 comments
RED ONE is a 12.6 megapixel digital film/HD camcorder
developed by Jim Jannard, founder of the Oakley sunglasses company.
The camera will retail for $17,500, and is alleged to outperform HD and digital film cameras from established companies like Sony, Arri, Panavision and Dalsa (whose offerings all cost well in excess of $100,000). The general consensus among pundits in media production circles is that Jannard's camera will be a true
disruptive technology.
Last night, no less than 24 hours after the
very first publically available sample images from the camera's
"Mysterium" sensor were posted to the RED Digital Cinema website, the company's development offices
were broken into.
According to Jannard, "Everything they took was camera and camera file related...there is no question all they came for was RED camera stuff."
(Additional obligatory and annoying YouTube links:
First public demonstration of the RED camera at the IBC convention in Amsterdam and the
RED Q & A session that followed.)
posted by melorama
on Sep 24, 2006 -
79 comments
How to make your own wireless camera remote. Man buys Minolta 5-D, can't find a remote for less than $30 on eBay; can't find any that are wireless; goes to an electronics store, buys the parts; makes his own wireless remote; then takes pictures of himself skating, using the remote!
I love diy stories like this. (Warning: popups at the linked site.)
posted by Lynsey
on Jul 9, 2006 -
22 comments
Ban on Camera Phones in Iraq Q: What do you do if your troops take pictures of physical and sexual abuse in American-run prisons in Iraq?
A: Ban cameras, of course. What the people can't see don't happen.
posted by dayvin
on May 23, 2004 -
73 comments
Camera Lenses are something i've never really understood, but should. This was the best stab at explaining I've ever read.
posted by mrben
on Mar 28, 2004 -
8 comments
The Kodak vs. the King .
Images of the the Belgian Congo (aka the Congo Free State) from it's heyday under the personal rule of the very evil
King Leopold. The contrast between the photographs used by
Leopolds apologists and those used by his
enemies (lead by the remorseless
E.D. Morel) is probably unsurprising but interesting as evidence of perhaps the first propaganda war to be dominated by photography. Also, the first genocidal atrocity to be, very partially, documented photographically.
The kodak has been a sore calamity to us. The most powerful enemy that has confronted us, indeed.... Every Yankee missionary and every interrupted trader sent home and got one; and now -- oh, well, the pictures get sneaked around everywhere, in spite of all we can do to ferret them out and suppress them.
Mark Twain,
King Leopold's Soliloquy
(most links go to the excellent
boondocksnet site which takes as its starting point Mark Twain and his anti-imperialist campaigns and branches out most impressively from there)
posted by thatwhichfalls
on Mar 20, 2004 -
6 comments
Pin-
hole photography is
nothing new. 300 years before there was film people were using the idea of the
Camera Obscura to project images onto nearby surfaces. Using the process to capture the images onto film was a simple progression. But camera cases break, and leak light exposing the film to early.
Enter
Thomas Hudson Reeve who folds his own one time only cameras with the very photo-paper he presents as his
finished work. Only a simple brass plate pinhole shutter is reused and developing is done in the camera by pouring the chemicals directly in.
Go check out
PaperCams for more.
posted by KnitWit
on Jan 3, 2003 -
12 comments
"It's a terrible thing, but it's time to embrace Big Brother" A high school in Santee California has implemented "security procedures" that would do Mr. Orwell proud. Wireless cameras the face and license plate of every driver and car entering the parking lot. If you go to the bathroom, your picture gets logged. Hall monitors will soon carry wireless computers that can pull up a student's school picture and class schedule. And they are considering implementing face recognition software. Installed over the summer, a few parents complained to the school system -
NOT that it was being done, but that they hadn't been notified. (
LA Times Link - metafilter99/metafilter99)
posted by Irontom
on Sep 9, 2002 -
39 comments
Lyudmila Putina and Laura Bush apparently forgetting there are cameras around. Switching gears now, for the smokers out there: just drink
water, and you'll be able to satisfy that nicotine craving
and quench your thirst with a single hand motion.
posted by Why
on May 24, 2002 -
11 comments
How many instances of 'Gee Whiz' can you fit on your hard drive? With cameras mounted on eyeglass frames, he suggests, we can document every moment of our lives and create a second-by-second digital diary. "There won't be any reason ever to forget anything anymore," he says. Vannevar Bush had a similar idea 50 years ago, though in that era the promising storage medium was microfilm rather than magnetic disks.
Hate to parrot /. But this article was just way too fascinating to pass up not sharing it with any of you no-slashdot readers.
posted by crasspastor
on Apr 18, 2002 -
9 comments
Thank God for Police hypocrisy for keeping me so amused. Seriously though, this is one of the best articles I've read in a long time. It's a five part series regarding the controversy of redlight cameras, and the evidence that those that administer them are in it for the $$$. For one, they seem to be placed on high-traffic / short yellow light intersections instead of the high-accident intersections. Oh, and it's made D.C. alone over $15 million in two years. Read it to find out how the researchers stretched numbers to get " tiny 3 percent increase in rear-enders" from a 767% increase.
posted by LuxFX
on Apr 9, 2002 -
35 comments
Amazon screws up bag promotion. Amazon messes up a 'Buy this camera and get that bag free" promotion to be "Buy this bag and get that camera free." As a result you can get a $350 Minolta Maxxum SLR for $40. We'll see how long this lasts. I know that when the airlines made this mistake, they had to honor it.
posted by kfury
on Nov 20, 2001 -
146 comments
The crimes they are a'changing. This comes from the daily police log of The Union newspaper Grass Valley/Nevada City, CA. Surveillance cameras (and apparently not very effective ones) were stolen while mystery powders kept the cops hopping.
posted by tnadeau
on Oct 25, 2001 -
5 comments
Government GPS surveillance through your digital camera. A DOJ project to go after pedophiles and obscenity-mongers by regulating digital still and motion cameras is slated to be introduced in Congress:
A DOJ project code-named "Indecent Images" plans to implant technologies developed to automatically recognize hard-core Internet sex images into the next generation of cameras. An II-compliant camera will refuse to take illegal photographs or videos, and could even quietly tip off law enforcement to illicit behavior. . .
The II draft says that "any variant" of digital still or video camera must include a GPS device and a transmitter that is compatible with U.S. pager networks. When a child pornographer takes an illegal photo, the camera recognizes it and transmits an encrypted message containing the image, the date, and the location to the local police -- who would then raid the home and save the child from continued erotic exploitation.
They've
got to be kidding. I'm not endorsing exploiting kids, natch, but I can't believe this this kind of surveillance is even being contemplated. . .
Then again, remembering Ashcroft's beady little eyes. . . (via
J. Orlin Grabbe)
posted by aflakete
on Apr 2, 2001 -
26 comments
The myth of megapixel cameras is explained here in detail, finally "illuminating" why digital resolution is often
worse than you'd expect. In brief, digital cameras interpolate to get a color image from a black and white CCD -- losing sharpness in the process, and taking up far more flash card space than reason dictates. Conclusion: buying into the
latest technology isn't worth
the expense, until camera companies wise up. Finally, evidence which backs up my faith in scanning photos taken on a (decidedly analog) Nikon N70! [via
Honeyguide]
posted by legibility
on Apr 16, 2000 -
6 comments
Everybody is blogging the intraoral camera link on Wired today. When I first saw it I was like "EEEEEEW!" I mean, it's bad enough I have to *hear* them drilling a(nother) hole in my head - I sure don't want to WATCH! I suppose as long as they don't use the same camera they use for
this, it doesn't really bother me too much.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe
on Feb 17, 2000 -
0 comments
Can someone please tell me why X10.com has such
warm and fuzzy 'family' style pages to describe their wireless camera, but
their ads look like they are promoting cameras for the sole purpose of catching beautiful women on screen? Are they promoting hidden cameras in bathrooms, changing stalls, and other privacy-robbing public places? Why the descrepency between their advertising and their site?
posted by mathowie
on Jan 4, 2000 -
3 comments
