New Technology? What, When, How

[beano500]

So what's going to be the next significant or radical change to photography.

We've had the digital revolution. We have the modular kit. We live in a world in which Photoshop is as present as the chip shop. We can share all the pnftillions of photos we take every second on the internetweb and occasionally even put them on paper for others to see. The D3 will eventually turn into the D9 and the 1DS Mark CLXXXIV. We can even talk to each other using our cameras.

And we can't get much more out of light: "Captain! I canna change the laws of physics!" So it's difficult to see how sensors can be any smaller, lenses any better.

In as much as any of us can predict the future, what d'ya reckon would be nice to have next?

[Simpo Two]

I'll take the 10-1000mm f1.0 VR please, 3" long and 2" diameter. If you're wondering how it's done, it uses software-emulated virtual lenses and mirrors. But it will still need me to point it in the right direction at the rght time.



Hey, I just looked out of my window and the resolution is stunning - I can't see any pixels at all! Wonder how big the file is?

[Tuna]

There's going to be more 'intelligent' editing and organising software. Stuff that begins to understand what's actually in your photo and makes decisions based on that.

For instance, automatic cross referencing of photos of the same person, things like photosynth that takes multiple photos and works out the 3-dimensional scene that they belong to, cameras that store the exact location of your photos as you take them. Retouch and adjust software will start to use these details to guide the editing process.

On point and shoot, the 'automatic aids' are going to get more sophisticated - focussing on faces will expand to spotting when people's eyes are shut, or the tops of their heads are cut off etc.

We might see cameras starting to take multiple reference shots when you press the button - using different exposures, focal lengths etc. - and software that allows you to pick and choose the elements you want to see in the final image. Think of it as bracketing-plus.

We'll also see the live preview/film modes starting to be used as a continuous stream of high resolution stills, so you can pick the instant that you want to use as an image. Already the new Canon 5D produces hi-def video that's more than up to the task of picking out mid-resolution stills.

Sensor wise, we're going to start seeing sensors that remove the need for artificial lighting in all but the darkest scenes - no more flash guns apart for artistic effect.

[Simpo Two]

Tuna said:

cameras that store the exact location of your photos as you take them.

We've got that one already - some DSLRs support GPS (via a strap-on box - not sure if any have it built in).

[Whitefly Swatter]

The next generation plugs into a socket behind your ear and records everything you see hear smell and do

the only downside is the battery (the size of a suit case) and the hard drive - solid state 1 Petabyte

[Tuna]

Simpo Two said:

Tuna said:

cameras that store the exact location of your photos as you take them.

We've got that one already - some DSLRs support GPS (via a strap-on box - not sure if any have it built in).

A lot of what I talked about is available in some form or other - either as an add-on, or some experimental demo. As these things become common features on cameras, I'd expect people to start finding new uses for them.

For instance, imagine a GPS + GSM enabled camera that allows you to blog on the spot, or a camera which will actually alert you to nearby scenic spots or even live photo opportunities. At big events, cameras could automatically choose to share a 'group view' of the action, and a server somewhere could then merge simultaneous shots into a hyper-image.

Or as face recognition comes online, expect sites like flickr to alert you to other photos of the same person or scene, or model sites to start automatically recommending models with similar looks.

[KenP]

I think the most obvious improvements we are likely to see, is the elimination of the current SLR system. A digital camera does not require a retracting mirror, pentaprism or shutter. The image falling on a continously functioning sensor could be fed to an internal LCD viewer (as happens on many video cameras) thus eliminating 90% of all mechanical moving parts which currently limit the life of a camera body (and greatly add to its production costs)

[Whitefly Swatter]

KenP said:

I think the most obvious improvements we are likely to see, is the elimination of the current SLR system. A digital camera does not require a retracting mirror, pentaprism or shutter. The image falling on a continously functioning sensor could be fed to an internal LCD viewer (as happens on many video cameras) thus eliminating 90% of all mechanical moving parts which currently limit the life of a camera body (and greatly add to its production costs)

there was one of these on the gadget show on monday - cant find it on their website

its the Panasonic Lumix G1

Edited by Whitefly Swatter on Friday 21st November 11:51

[GetCarter]

Some way of keeping fking dust out I hope.

[RobDickinson]

IMO liquid (oil?) lens elements.

[Simpo Two]

Tuna said:

For instance, imagine a GPS + GSM enabled camera that allows you to blog on the spot, or a camera which will actually alert you to nearby scenic spots or even live photo opportunities. At big events, cameras could automatically choose to share a 'group view' of the action, and a server somewhere could then merge simultaneous shots into a hyper-image.

I remember Philips predicting 10 years ago that all the technologies would merge into one lump - a hand-held widget that does everything. And in a way we already have it. But I don't believe that it will offer the ultimate quality or convenience in all its tasks, in the same way that a Swiss Army knife doesn't replace a workshop.

KenP said:

I think the most obvious improvements we are likely to see, is the elimination of the current SLR system. A digital camera does not require a retracting mirror, pentaprism or shutter. The image falling on a continously functioning sensor could be fed to an internal LCD viewer (as happens on many video cameras) thus eliminating 90% of all mechanical moving parts which currently limit the life of a camera body (and greatly add to its production costs)

It seems a shame to replace a cheap piece of glass with an expensive vision system that has to chop the scene up into pixels, send it to a screen and then display it. Sometimes simple is best I think, but some people (generally from the 'POS' side of the street) seem to have a problem with viewfinders.

[dilbert]

How about a camera, that you just wave about. Push the button, and it takes 1000 pictures whilst you wave it about in the general direction of the subject. Then the camera corrects each picture for perspective, and so on, before combining them into one super high resolution image where generally the centre of the image is better resolution than the edges.

Crop to suit.

Expect a resolution perhaps ten times better than the current state of the art. Perhaps even 3D.

Edited by dilbert on Friday 21st November 12:35

[Elderly]

How about a camera with a built in 'phone?

[beano500]

Elderly said:

How about a camera with a built in vacuum flask to keep Beano's cocoa warm?

[KenP]

Simpo Two said:

KenP said:

I think the most obvious improvements we are likely to see, is the elimination of the current SLR system. A digital camera does not require a retracting mirror, pentaprism or shutter. The image falling on a continously functioning sensor could be fed to an internal LCD viewer (as happens on many video cameras) thus eliminating 90% of all mechanical moving parts which currently limit the life of a camera body (and greatly add to its production costs)

It seems a shame to replace a cheap piece of glass with an expensive vision system that has to chop the scene up into pixels, send it to a screen and then display it. Sometimes simple is best I think, but some people (generally from the 'POS' side of the street) seem to have a problem with viewfinders.

That's just where you are wrong. The mechanical parts (swinging mirror,damping mechanism, curtains, shutter blind do not constitute a cheap piece of glass)of the current system add disproportionately to the cost and wear of a camerabody. Chopping up into pixels? What do you think you are storing on your card, analogue? All the necessary electronics already exist on current cameras. If you want to keep it simple then just peer over the top of the camera

[twister]

KenP said:

The image falling on a continously functioning sensor could be fed to an internal LCD viewer (as happens on many video cameras) thus eliminating 90% of all mechanical moving parts which currently limit the life of a camera body (and greatly add to its production costs)

I'd like to see this happen when, and only when, the resolution of said LCD is high enough for pixels not to be noticeable even if I go looking for them, when the refresh rate is high enough and the image lag is low enough for the image to look genuinely live and not just a slightly choppy laggy version of reality, and when the low light performance is at least as good as a prism/mirror setup. Until then, no thanks.

[_dobbo_]

Simpo Two said:

Hey, I just looked out of my window and the resolution is stunning - I can't see any pixels at all! Wonder how big the file is?

Resolution of the human eye looking through a window is about 324 megapixels, so it would be a big file! Luckily your brain has loads of storage space.

Elderly said:

How about a camera with a built in 'phone?

Actually this is what I've been waiting for! Why can't Canon add a crap phone to a decent camera, instead of Nokia adding a crap camera to a decent phone.

In fact why can't I have a decent camera AND phone? ANSWER ME!!!!!

Edited by _dobbo_ on Friday 21st November 13:53

[Tuna]

Simpo Two said:

Tuna said:

For instance, imagine a GPS + GSM enabled camera that allows you to blog on the spot, or a camera which will actually alert you to nearby scenic spots or even live photo opportunities. At big events, cameras could automatically choose to share a 'group view' of the action, and a server somewhere could then merge simultaneous shots into a hyper-image.

I remember Philips predicting 10 years ago that all the technologies would merge into one lump - a hand-held widget that does everything. And in a way we already have it. But I don't believe that it will offer the ultimate quality or convenience in all its tasks, in the same way that a Swiss Army knife doesn't replace a workshop.

I don't see convergence as a good thing, nor something that's actually going to happen outside of the 'bling' consumer niche where feature count is everything. However, for the top end stuff there's a difference between a camera with positioning and networking facilities, and the addition of 'swiss army' features like a phone, MP3 player etc.

The things that will pervade cameras in future are the things that help transport, share and organise images, from low end 'get it onto Photobox' tools, through to high end 'work-flow with backup and image management' features.

[GetCarter]

_dobbo_ said:

Luckily your brain has loads of storage space.

Mine is corrupted. I've tried a re-install, but no luck.

[Tuna]

GetCarter said:

_dobbo_ said:

Luckily your brain has loads of storage space.

Mine is corrupted. I've tried a re-install, but no luck.

That's what you get for using Macs.