[Bubbaloo]

BTW, why do they call it Ultrasonic I wonder. "Sonic" is sound, right?

[Tora_2097]

@ Brian:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasonic_motor

[Bubbaloo]

Nice, thanks for the info!

[sandykoufax]

Hasselblad acquired by Ventizz Capital Fund, will explore 'brand new markets'
http://www.engadget.com/2011/07/05/hass ... ore-brand/

of course, it's not concerned to me.

[Hervé]

I prefer this one Sandy...

http://www.s.leica-camera.com/leica-s-system/

[itsallgoode9]

edit... maybe it's the end of Nikon and Canon.. maybe... hihi

http://www.lytro.com/

Personally, I think it's a gimmick. That's why it will be marketed to the low-end camera market. It's for bad photographers who need more options for tweaking their poorly composed photographs.

Actually, if this eventually comes to be common use in pro markets (which i doubt will happen soon, if ever) it could be quite useful! A lot of my bottle render work deals with rendering different flavor labels and applying it to an already photographed liquor bottle. Most of the photos I'm I am working with come from Hassleblad 40 and 60 megapixel digital backs and when you're viewing at 100% nearly every one of them is blurry. And these are very top level photographers shooting for smirnoff, jack daniels etc. These photos just don't get viewed at 100% until after the photoshoot, so it would be a godsend to be able to make minor focus adjustments to get them sharp. Pretty every project where i'm mixing cg with photography I have to blur my render to mesh with the photography

[Hervé]

well dunno about bottles, but food photography cost an eye, and if you don't take a super specialized food photographer, usually it ends up "Not Usable"...

But you're saying the hasselblad photos they send you have a focus problem..? that's weird..

[itsallgoode9]

Bottle photographers are the same as food photographers in the sense of cost and specialization. I mean, the blurring isn't major, it's just something that's going to be noticeable on any image when looking at 50mp images at full size. Like at that size, if you're the tiniest bit off or accidentally focused on wrong part of the object it will be noticable. It's very minimal and more of an annoyance than anything, but I hate having to spend tons of render time getting a crisp render, only to have to blur it a little in the end.

[Hervé]

hey... well I understand you... always bummer to degrade a nice work to match a bad one... but now I am curious.. why are they not giving to you the entire bottle to render..? that would be a more smooth workflow no..?

h/

so you're saying they're as expensive as food photographers..? woot... maybe soon to change I think...

in the past when nobody had a good camera, marriage photographers made a fortune... no more..

[sandykoufax]

https://www.lytro.com/camera

It's out!

[Hervé]

pretty interesting... but I can't find any photos larger than 500 pix...., so I guess it will be fun for people posting all day long on facebook or so...

[sandykoufax]

Agree. Before seeing actual user review, I cannot estimate.

[numerobis]

pretty interesting... but I can't find any photos larger than 500 pix...., so I guess it will be fun for people posting all day long on facebook or so...

from the specs:
"Light Field Resolution: 11 Megarays"

[Hervé]

yes very small...

I noticed when you click on a photo to zoom in.. it's just enlarging it...

so how much is 11 megarays.. 500 pixels...?

[numerobis]

yes very small...

I noticed when you click on a photo to zoom in.. it's just enlarging it...

so how much is 11 megarays.. 500 pixels...?

11 pixels ?!?