[chupathingie]

Much as I love large landscape prints, I think I’ll be sticking with this 5DII even if Canon comes up with a competitor. On the other hand, if I ever get my pennies in a pile and buy some good glass (read:RF Royce Conical mirror) I could certainly use the added pixel count…

[chupathingie]

I’m just wondering, when it gets there, what this is going to do in imagery for DOF in macro….

Interesting question. I imagine it’s possible to have everything in focus, but I have yet to see one of their shots done with a wide DOF.

I stand corrected: according to this article, it is not currently possible to have everything in focus.

We now return you to the Japanese edition of TWIP/NWA
(Train Wreck In Progress/Now With Acronyms)

[chupathingie]

nope, all clear this morning. 🙂

[chupathingie]

hah…you should read some of the logs where I work someday. I didn’t think the military could be topped on the acronym front. I was wrong.

[chupathingie]

Oh, and for the rest of you wondering what the hell we’re going on about… GCE stands for Gross Conceptual Error; You really did not want to see those 3 letters anywhere on your paperwork after exams were graded.

[chupathingie]

… but was still better than the mythical WIAS.

That one is lost on me.

Yeah me too, class of ’83 here so must be something the younger nukes are hearing. Only other one I can remember is RTFQ.

Wrong Initial A-School. It was reserved for horrendous GCE’s. Like the guy in week ten of ET school who still didn’t know Ohms Law.

Yikes! I’m a chemist and even I know Ohm’s law. It’s the one that states:
“A man’s ohm is his castle.” right?

Nah, Ohm’s law states that any question that’s going to be on the weekly exam gets an ohm-sign with a tail drawn on it next to the item on the chalkboard (depends on whether you guys had my HTFF instructor or not…)

So how long has Farktography been the Old Nuke’s Home? 😆

…at least if I get drunk and start talking DNPs and skew divergence a few people won’t think I’m insane…

[chupathingie]

I’m just wondering, when it gets there, what this is going to do in imagery for DOF in macro….

Interesting question. I imagine it’s possible to have everything in focus, but I have yet to see one of their shots done with a wide DOF.

[chupathingie]

… but was still better than the mythical WIAS.

That one is lost on me.

[chupathingie]

I could be very wrong here but I’ve always assumed (since I first heard of this stuff) that they were just using shallow depth of field and varying the focus over rapid image samples, ie maybe a video type processing/sensor arrangement and a standard lens. Would that not achieve the same thing?
As previously stated, could be a huge GCE on my part and I don’t have time to research it.

I had to go digging, but the information for the image is gathered in a single exposure. There’s a microlens array in front of the sensor that redirects light from different directions to the underlying pixels, which are then assembled into a final image via software. So not only are you capturing the light from the image, you are also capturing the direction the light is coming from. The downside of this is that it takes many more pixels on the sensor to produce a single pixel in the final which explains the reduced resolution of the camera.

[chupathingie]

GCE

I’ve not seen anyone use that acronym since I was in nuke school back in ’85. Getting a GCE on any question on an exam was guaranteed to get someone mandatory extra study to the tune of 10 hrs a week.

[chupathingie]

oh yes… z-buffer data is very flexible… I hope I’m not speaking greek with that. By way of explanation: most 3d graphics packages allow you to define extra channels in your output frames. This lets you have an alpha channel, say, for compositing CGI with live action (rotoscoping). You can also dump the z-position for each pixel in relation to the camera into a z-channel, which can then be used (and quite often is) for post-processing in exactly the manner Orionid has described. If your software can build a standard z-channel, importing your images into 3DSMAX, Maya, Blender, etc and combining them with other images or CGI is going to be childs play. Altering the lighting is just as easy, as you now would have a 3d dataset for everything in the image.

hmmm… that means the camera will also function as a 3d scanner…

[chupathingie]

Plama, if you really want to dig into some research, the imaging forums at that site are chock-full of information with everything from webcams to CMOS to CCD along with all manner of processing software. WARNING: mention your place of employment and you’re gonna have a lot of new friends…

[chupathingie]

Just realized that part one doesn’t directly link to the other parts.
Here’s the rest. Part four is labeled “Image Sampling”, the rest have the parts labeled; interspersed with other articles by the same author.

[chupathingie]

That’s not that much reading. very interesting though.

It’s funny. I won’t think twice about picking up a novel that’s 1000 pages, but if the scroll bar on the right of a browser is shorter than 1/2″ it becomes “a long read”. 😆

[chupathingie]

wow, those long exposures really make for a fantasy sky. Hard to pick a favorite.

Was that fisheye one of these, by any chance? They’re sold under several brand names…neat thing about them is that they’re marketed as EF-S, but function on EF mounts…

that’s the very one.

I’m really wanting the 35mm f/1.4 now.

I LOVE that fish-eye. Mine looks a bit aborted, I had to cut the shield off and I wasn’t exactly artisan about it. It’s over 180? on a full-frame, with a not quite circular image circle. 3 frames easily cover a full 360?x180? panorama. In daylight stopped down the depth of field is WAY wide. I’ve been waiting for the opportunity to lay the camera on its back in the middle of a field while a storm rolls in, but we haven’t had much storm action and what we have had I’ve been badly timed for.

[Author]

Posts