What's new

Now that HDR software is established I was wondering what would be the next
thing to come along. I was watching a TV show the other day. It was a crime
program. The investigator set up this scanning device in the centre of the
crime scene and produced a 3D scan of the whole area. I was wondering when
or if it would be possible to build this capacity into a zoom lens so that
you could take a close up picture of two flowers and actually have them both
in focus. Does anyone know if this may become possible some day?

YDOD wrote:
Now that HDR software is established I was wondering what would be the
next thing to come along. I was watching a TV show the other day. It was
a crime program. The investigator set up this scanning device in the
centre of the crime scene and produced a 3D scan of the whole area. I
was wondering when or if it would be possible to build this capacity
into a zoom lens so that you could take a close up picture of two
flowers and actually have them both in focus. Does anyone know if this
may become possible some day?

Google 'Focus Stacking' - not what you're imagining but accomplishes the
task.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 11:26:11 -0600, "YDOD" wrote:

Now that HDR software is established I was wondering what would be the next
thing to come along. I was watching a TV show the other day. It was a crime
program. The investigator set up this scanning device in the centre of the
crime scene and produced a 3D scan of the whole area. I was wondering when
or if it would be possible to build this capacity into a zoom lens so that
you could take a close up picture of two flowers and actually have them both
in focus. Does anyone know if this may become possible some day?

Get a good P&S camera for macro photography and you can already do this.
They excel at macro photography due to their deeper DOF.

If you do a stack of in-focus frames with focus-bracketing (CHDK's built-in
focus-bracketing control is exceptional for this purpose), from just one
vantage point, then run them through Picolay (freeware) and it will build a
3D anaglyph pair for you. Thought you might like to know this, since you
mentioned the 3D scan thing. Then too, there's the SDM version of CHDK that
is specially written and designed for stereo photographer buffs, synching
two cameras accurately and fast enough to catch water-drips in stereo using
available light alone, no need for any stop-motion flash in a darkened
room.

Though the laser-scanning method you are speaking of is already done in
real life (it's not just a made-for-TV sci-fi thing). Archeologists use
this technique to record and reconstruct large historical sites. The
equipment a bit out of reach for the average consumer.

On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 11:26:11 -0600, "YDOD"
wrote:

Now that HDR software is established I was wondering what would be the next
thing to come along. I was watching a TV show the other day. It was a crime
program. The investigator set up this scanning device in the centre of the
crime scene and produced a 3D scan of the whole area. I was wondering when
or if it would be possible to build this capacity into a zoom lens so that
you could take a close up picture of two flowers and actually have them both
in focus. Does anyone know if this may become possible some day?

You can do this already with tilt and shift lenses/cameras.



Eric Stevens

Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 11:26:11 -0600, "YDOD"
wrote:

Now that HDR software is established I was wondering what would be the next
thing to come along. I was watching a TV show the other day. It was a crime
program. The investigator set up this scanning device in the centre of the
crime scene and produced a 3D scan of the whole area. I was wondering when
or if it would be possible to build this capacity into a zoom lens so that
you could take a close up picture of two flowers and actually have them both
in focus. Does anyone know if this may become possible some day?

You can do this already with tilt and shift lenses/cameras.


Only up to three flowers. T&S allows focus on a plane that isn't
perpendicular to the lens axis, but with more than three flowers you may
find that they don't define a single plane. In practice, with 3 flowers,
you already hope that the plane they define is within the tilt
capabilities of the lens.

--
Bertrand

Paul Furman wrote:
YDOD wrote:
Now that HDR software is established I was wondering what would be the
next thing to come along. I was watching a TV show the other day. It
was a crime program. The investigator set up this scanning device in
the centre of the crime scene and produced a 3D scan of the whole
area. I was wondering when or if it would be possible to build this
capacity into a zoom lens so that you could take a close up picture of
two flowers and actually have them both in focus. Does anyone know if
this may become possible some day?

Google 'Focus Stacking' - not what you're imagining but accomplishes the
task.


Jim Frazier Sydney, Australia, (previously David Attenbrough's
cameraman) invented and fabricated a lens that is said the "defy
physics" in it's extreme depth of field focusing. He invented it for
wildlife filming and machined it up in his back yard.

I suppose it helps to be inventive if you don't believe in any rules
being set in stone. Jim's lens set the established "rules of optics" on
it's ear when his lens made many of those rules obsolete.

His story just exemplifies what I've known for 40 years... It is the
originators, not the imitators who are responsible for everything in the
world.

Jim said:
"As with any lens if you want depth you must stop down. But this lens
achieves greater depth at any given stop. Let us assume that, using the
widest possible lens, the desired magnification of the foreground object
has been established, and, using a suitable f-stop, you have achieved
sharp focus from that object to infinity. But - you are unhappy with the
wide angle perspective. By maintaining the close-up object magnification
with any other of the lenses in the kit, you will achieve exactly the
same sharp focus from close-up to infinity.

Nothing here about "focus stacking". The demo video that Panavision have
is really quite remarkable. I imagine if (when) Jim gets around to
making a macro version of it for DSLRs, the current wow factor images
being touted that use focus stacked for clarity will look quite mundane
in comparison.

If you can imagine being able to shoot a caterpillar crawling on your
lens whilst filming a group of people at a party and everything from the
caterpillar's feet to the furthermost object is clearly focused, you
might get a feel for what he achieved.
http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/case_studies/frazier.htm

--
D-Mac...

On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:42:58 +1000, D-Mac wrote:


http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/case_studies/frazier.htm

"a 'set and forget' focus which holds everything, from front of
lens to infinity, in focus"

Uh, that's called hyperfocal distance, on very wide-angle lenses that's
usually from near the front lens element to infinity at the proper
apertures. My fish-eye adapter is in focus from the front surface of the
lens to infinity when used on a P&S camera. I have to be cautious about
keeping dust off that front lens-element or it shows up in the images clear
as anything else.

"a swivel tip so that, without moving the camera, you can swivel
the lens in any direction, completing a sphere if need be"

A gimbaled 1st-surface mirror in an elbow, geared to always bisect the
angle. I fail to see why that's so unique. They're used that way as
90-degree eye-piece adapters for telescopes all the time. (The cheaper ones
anyway, better is a prism.)

"a built-in image rotator. This allows the image to be rotated inside the lens
without spinning the camera."

A dove-prism, been known about for centuries. The image rotates 2x's as
much as the prism turned on its long axis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dove_prism Was also incorporated as
special-effects attachment gimmicks for early home-movie cameras, for many
decades. So you could spin your subject on a central axis. Not much purpose
served by this for any valid recording needs. Unless of course you're going
to revive the old Bat-Man TV Show and spin your subjects from one scene to
the next, and not do it in editing.

I fail to see any 8th wonder of the world here. Sounds like a spoofed
web-page that someone put together for ****s 'n grins. They apparently only
had some pre-school basics of optics to go on when authoring it. There's
nothing mysterious about any of its magic claims. "In the late `70s I
consulted a CSIRO physicist who said that what I wanted was impossible."
That's just simple bull****.

Especially when I got to this part at the end.

"What used to be a three day shoot now takes only one day because
Frazier's lens has done away with the need for teams of people to rig up
complicated setups every time the director wants a new angle. It's as
simple as adjusting the swivel tip.

Wow, someone would have to turn their camera in a new direction to
accomplish the same. Yes, that would surely take an extra 2 days to do
that.

This fake-sounding hype sounds like just that. Makes no sense whatsoever.

Unless you can provide a link showing this "wonder lens" in use, or since
it's already been patented and used in productions (according to the
article you linked to) then a link to an exploded diagram of its design
should be available somewhere. I have no intentions of going on a
wild-google chase for your amusement.

Until then, I'll just file this in the NET-BS folder, where so much of
what's on the net belongs.

On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:02:16 -0500, BS-Detector - ON
wrote:
snip


Until then, I'll just file this in the NET-BS folder, where so much of
what's on the net belongs.



Along with yourself.

BS-Detector - ON wrote:

This fake-sounding hype sounds like just that. Makes no sense whatsoever.

Unless you can provide a link showing this "wonder lens" in use, or since
it's already been patented and used in productions (according to the
article you linked to) then a link to an exploded diagram of its design
should be available somewhere. I have no intentions of going on a
wild-google chase for your amusement.

Until then, I'll just file this in the NET-BS folder, where so much of
what's on the net belongs.



The bit I like is when an anonymous troll sets out to ridicule a highly
regarded cinematographer with dozens of very popular movies under his
belt ...who got over a million bucks from Panavision for an invention of
a radical new lens...

Who did you say you were?

When I sold my algorithm for enlarging digital images I got the same
**** heaped on me... Not Mark Thomas in drag are you? Your post is as
rotten as his.


--
D-Mac...

D-Mac wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
YDOD wrote:
Now that HDR software is established I was wondering what would be
the next thing to come along. I was watching a TV show the other day.
It was a crime program. The investigator set up this scanning device
in the centre of the crime scene and produced a 3D scan of the whole
area. I was wondering when or if it would be possible to build this
capacity into a zoom lens so that you could take a close up picture
of two flowers and actually have them both in focus. Does anyone know
if this may become possible some day?

Google 'Focus Stacking' - not what you're imagining but accomplishes
the task.


Jim Frazier Sydney, Australia, (previously David Attenbrough's
cameraman) invented and fabricated a lens that is said the "defy
physics" in it's extreme depth of field focusing. He invented it for
wildlife filming and machined it up in his back yard.

I suppose it helps to be inventive if you don't believe in any rules
being set in stone. Jim's lens set the established "rules of optics" on
it's ear when his lens made many of those rules obsolete.

His story just exemplifies what I've known for 40 years... It is the
originators, not the imitators who are responsible for everything in the
world.

Jim said:
"As with any lens if you want depth you must stop down. But this lens
achieves greater depth at any given stop. Let us assume that, using the
widest possible lens, the desired magnification of the foreground object
has been established, and, using a suitable f-stop, you have achieved
sharp focus from that object to infinity. But - you are unhappy with the
wide angle perspective. By maintaining the close-up object magnification
with any other of the lenses in the kit, you will achieve exactly the
same sharp focus from close-up to infinity.

Nothing here about "focus stacking". The demo video that Panavision have
is really quite remarkable. I imagine if (when) Jim gets around to
making a macro version of it for DSLRs, the current wow factor images
being touted that use focus stacked for clarity will look quite mundane
in comparison.

It's just a wide angle lens on a periscope so you don't have to dig a
hole to get a worm's-eye view with a big hollywood movie camera
attached. I'm sure it's a well refined setup of this concept but nothing
magic. His skill in getting Panavision to rent the gear is the dramatic
part of the success story. The light loss from the periscope setup plus
having to stop down for DOF means it's only usable in broad daylight.


If you can imagine being able to shoot a caterpillar crawling on your
lens whilst filming a group of people at a party and everything from the
caterpillar's feet to the furthermost object is clearly focused, you
might get a feel for what he achieved.

They got busted for that one.

Set up a medium format lens pointing at the landscape (without camera)
and position a caterpillar upside down where the film would be, now
focus a macro lens on that spot and you get a tiny caterpillar in focus
with a background landscape in focus. Classic smoke and mirrors. For a
nature documentary, it can be used to illustrate a good representation
of the creature in its natural setting but as a magic lens claim it's a lie.


http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/case_studies/frazier.htm



--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam