My quick guess having looked at the article is that rather than simply recording the intensity of the light at each site on the sensor they can also get direction of the light ray. In other words, rather than an array of values they have an array of light vectors. Armed with the vectors, you can in principle extrapolate the behavior of the light rays and calculate what the light is doing in a focal volume rather than just a focal plane. It's like calculating the future positions of bodies in space by knowing the current positions AND velocities of each and using the equations of motion. Neat.
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Stan Halpin <[email protected]> wrote: > It happens that there was a short article on this in the current Economist > magazine: > http://www.economist.com/node/21527019 > > stan > > On Sep 15, 2011, at 8:36 PM, John Francis wrote: > >> >> That's mostly incorrect. >> >> The plenoptic cameras don't record images in the traditional way; >> what they record is far more like the mosaic image insect eyes see. >> >> Post processing converts the recorded data into a more typical >> view. One of the things the post-processing can do is recreate >> depth-of-field effects at an arbitrary plane of focus (including >> the sort of effect you get from a tilt lens, and even non-flat >> 'planes' of focus. Or, if you want, it can produce images with >> everything in focus. >> >> The downside of attempting to derive distance information (which >> is what you have to do to simulate depth-of-field), and all the >> other possible tricks, is that you will end up with significantly >> reduced resolution. As a ballpark figure, you're going to lose >> about one order of magnitude in pixel count - sometimes even more. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 10:15:00AM +1000, Paul Ewins wrote: >>>> From what I have read, but maybe misunderstood, it has multiple planes of >>>> focus and you can choose which one you want afterwards. It is kind of like >>>> one-shot focus stacking. The downside is that this reduces the number of >>>> pixels used in the final image quite dramatically, since a lot of the >>>> others are out of focus and get binned. it is an idea that is waiting for >>>> sensor technology to catch up before it is useful for photographers. >>> >>> Paul Ewins >>> Melbourne, Australia >>> >>> On 16/09/2011, at 9:47 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: >>> >>>> whats with this new technology where you can change the focus of the photo >>>> AFTER its captured? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> J.C. O'Connell (mailto:[email protected]) >>>> Join the CD PLAYER & DISC Discussions : >>>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ >>>> http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdsound/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>> follow the directions. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> [email protected] >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
