• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Is a bokeh factory possible

iphone x

  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 13 September 2017 - 05:27 PM

The iPhone 7 plus came with a pseudo bokeh effect and now the iPhone X has gone one better with a total blackout effect

 

So, is it possible to say make a Nikon 105mm f1.4 background signature, which a future iPhone could use? That is, you would just take a shot and then select which lens you want as your background.

 

This new feature must surely be a final nail in the point & shoot cameras as it is bound to spread into every other phone maker?


From the sunny side of the Alps.

#2 mike

mike

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 13 September 2017 - 08:43 PM

I'm not quite following you. So you're saying you want an algorithm that knows how far the subject is from the camera and applies a bokeh accordingly and based on a particular aperture. Within this feature would be select-able  presets. These presets could be built to emulate certain lenses. Why not add a few sliders for customization? I doubt Apple, or any manufacturer doing this (except an OEM like Nikon) would call it a Nikon xxx preset. I do not see why not?

 

But I don't understand the reasoning of it being a final nail in the P&S camera market? Why couldn't any camera OEM add a similar feature (there may even be one).  Also, a dedicated camera will always outperform a cell phone, built in gimicks/apps aside. However, these can be applied later in the slew of software out there.

 

IMO, as a recent thread just talked about, point and shoots are pretty much dead, or back to pre digital sales, in lieu of smart phones. Most people are happy to take a pic, using a filter of sorts or applying canned post processing. You know, add ears, noses, bokeh, whatever the latest app does, and post the picture on Snapchat, Instagram, FB, etc...



#3 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 14 September 2017 - 07:03 AM

I'm not quite following you. 

 

 

One of the few things left that compact cameras (up to 1") can do better than a phone is to give better background blur (AKA bokeh).

 

But since the iPhone 7+ with its dual cam giving it an effective zoom of around 28-120mm and the ability to blur backgrounds, it would seem that compacts will be a thing of the past.

 

And now we see that not only can a phone blur the background it can actually remove it - totally!

 

Now, imagine Apple buys the top 85 and 105mm f1.4 lenses and builds 10,000 stock images, and instead of blacking out the background the phone gives you a choice of backgrounds that match the colors of your original image. You now have the face of the iPhone shot combined with a background lens of your choice.

 

“Why couldn't any camera OEM add a similar feature?”

 

Well, that's what I want to know. I'm not sure if the processing powers in a compact camera can do what the iPhone X can do. Also, the iPhone can jump into the Cloud and grab a background from the thousands (millions) of images it will have available. There is no way that a camera - any camera, can do this since it has no cellular connection.

 

Also, the phone doesn't just blur out the background it gives you a choice of lighting effects of the face before you take the shot. Again, I don't know if a camera could offer such a thing.


From the sunny side of the Alps.

#4 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 14 September 2017 - 07:58 AM

I think it's possible and probably it makes sense from a marketing point of view. It's part of the process of destroying photography that we were talking about the past month.


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#5 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 14 September 2017 - 08:24 AM

 

It's part of the process of destroying photography that we were talking about the past month.

 

I would have thought that getting more people to take photos would actually help in the enjoyment of photography, however you wish to define what a photograph is.


From the sunny side of the Alps.

#6 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 14 September 2017 - 08:45 AM

First, the result is no big deal - even if the computing is awesome and most miraculous, but the result remains on beancounter's art level - which is what Apple became today. Says me, the Apple user.

 

It's no big deal to me because a face and black background need to have another reason than just being kind of a filter like toy camera, softener or whatever - it will get boring pretty soon because it's lame and it doesn't work well in bright sunlight. Or ist it also softening down harsh shadows?

 

Given the price of this "phone", I'm very tempted to ask "and that's all it can do? No more bells and whistles?" But then, there are coffee machines which cost much more than that and only brew coffee.

 

Don't get me wrong, Studor13: I haven't read much about this new function and I will keep it that way, as I will never buy an iPhone this expensive - so it would be a waste of time. This post is not because I like to put things in perspective. It can have all possible filters, functions and what else, but it still is a phone with all the limits of the screen and lens design and all the freedom coming with taking pictures without carrying a ton of gear.

 

I'm looking at the result and it doesn't convince me. Even if Apple bought the most expensive lenses and makes 150.000 pictures with blurred background to offer you a (basically) wallpaper for download from the cloud. That's totally lame and will usually nor fit in the situation - these highly expensive lenses do not only have great bokeh, but also sharpness - it's the effect of both, not only an exchanged background. which will lack the transition to the subject and I'm not even talking about foreground.

 

Forget that crap. 



#7 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 14 September 2017 - 09:35 AM

 

Forget that crap. 

 

 

It's crap to people who have serious equipment and are comparing to results from Full-Frame cameras. But for the millions of mums and kids who just want to have fun I think it's a killer feature.

 

I think that there are things that we tend to dismiss as useless until we actually try them.

 

For example, the wife got me an Apple Watch Series II (yes, she paid full price just a few days before the Series 3 was announced and the Series 3 is $70 cheaper), and guess what?

 

This fitness app thing that I thought was “crap” is actually really amazing. But it is only when I used it that I saw the light, so to speak.

 

Maybe you should try the iPhone 8+ or X first before deciding that it's not worthwhile?


From the sunny side of the Alps.

#8 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 14 September 2017 - 09:37 AM

I would have thought that getting more people to take photos would actually help in the enjoyment of photography, however you wish to define what a photograph is.

 

 

 

Making more people shooting a trigger doesn't mean that they enjoy "photography": means only they enjoy shooting a trigger. All the technology we're talking about is basically an evolution of point-and-shoot: make me shoot more photos, more quickly, without thinking of it too much; this goes to the direction of mass-made products, not artistic products. We'll see floods of selfies, with the same backgrounds, filling the socials and being quickly forgotten, because more selfies will flood. The opposite of an artistic photography, that will stand by the time.

 

The problem of "democratisation of art" is known, and it has already turned into mass-made product music, for instance. The good way of educating people to an art doesn't totally focus on making people more or less capable to "produce" art objects, but first of all learning from masters. Easening the "production" of objects will make more and more people less willingly to study, and focusing all their enthusiasm on the latest iPhone model rather than opening a book of Ansel Adams or such.


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#9 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 14 September 2017 - 09:48 AM

It's crap to people who have serious equipment and are comparing to results from Full-Frame cameras. But for the millions of mums and kids who just want to have fun I think it's a killer feature.

 

I think that there are things that we tend to dismiss as useless until we actually try them.

 

For example, the wife got me an Apple Watch Series II (yes, she paid full price just a few days before the Series 3 was announced and the Series 3 is $70 cheaper), and guess what?

 

This fitness app thing that I thought was “crap” is actually really amazing. But it is only when I used it that I saw the light, so to speak.

 

Maybe you should try the iPhone 8+ or X first before deciding that it's not worthwhile?

 

Nope. My normal cliché answer to smartphones applies here as well: I don't like phones smarter than me, over time they do make me even dumber than I already am.

 

It's like giving a real fast car to someone who uses to practice running - now he will loosing some running skills because it's tempting to use the car.

 

Studor13, there are tons of things I could do with an iPod or iPad as well - I don't, because these devices basically are time-suckers and I feel they keep me away from more essential things. 

 

Trying an iPhone to do things I already can do with a camera which cannot even send SMS - I don't see the point. I take it my judgement is the one of an ignorant, I can live with that. I also can perfectly live without being on Facebook, Twitter, whatsapp, tinder or whatever. I see the Smombies, they are not in particualr attracting me. And I paid loads of money to things to use with an iPod or iPad, adapters, microphones, covers, card-readers, headphones, docking stations, mixer consoles, drawers are flooded with this crap. I keep them to remind me that each couple of months Apple drives a new "dernier cri"-pig through the alleys of the digital village. Happy consuming, just without me.

 

Then Smartwatch didn't teach you better?  Alright, not my prob. Hell, the new iPhone is worth a pretty cool drone - which has more use to me than a cellphone.

 

Oh, and I doubt that mummsies will find this feature sooo great. If they find it at all...


  • stoppingdown likes this

#10 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,978 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 14 September 2017 - 09:48 AM

I have not used the iphone 7/8 Plus or the iPhone X (obviously), but have seen the bokeh effect the camera can create and to be honest: I'm quite impressed (given these are images coming from a tiny sensor smart phone).

After seeing the keynote, I was less impressed by the artificial lighting effects, though. To me, it looked just like that: artificial.

Now, to answer the question why it just can't be entered into common P&S cameras: it requires two cameras to create a depth map (sort of a "Lytro light"). You could of course do that in a P&S camera, too, but given most of them use fairly big lenses and sensors (compared to smartphone camera modules), the result would probably be quite bulky.

Regarding the watch, I am actually considering getting one, too, for the exactly same reason. Since the inital Apple watch was introduced, I did not really see any use case for one (for myself), but can imagine now that this one application (monitor activity and fitness) might justify getting one.
Editor
photozone.de

#11 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 14 September 2017 - 09:56 AM

And what can Apple watch do better than any ordinary fitness tracker which at least has some battery life?

 

Occasionally I also was impressed what's possible with an iPhone or galaxy or whatever, but then I saw the device used by Apple to get these 6 m high street banners. Didn't look less amssive than any FF DSLR to me.  :P



#12 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,978 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 14 September 2017 - 09:57 AM

Nope. My normal cliché answer to smartphones applies here as well: I don't like phones smarter than me, over time they do make me even dumber than I already am.
 
It's like giving a real fast car to someone who uses to practice running - now he will loosing some running skills because it's tempting to use the car.


Very valid point... in fact we now have the technology to carry the whole world's wisdom in our pockest, yet it seems that for most people it's just a time-killer tool instead.

There is a striking analogy to cars, but not the way you described it: modern cars have so many technical aids built in that take over in critical situations, that you don't actually need to know or even practice how to handle a car properly. This is great, of course, and has obviously saved a lot of lifes. However, it sometimes feels that it gives a false impression of safety to many drivers, relying too much on all these assisting systems and probably completely unaware of the physical limits (which I had to learn the hard way in driving school and especially the first years after)
Editor
photozone.de

#13 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,978 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 14 September 2017 - 10:00 AM

And what can Apple watch do better than any ordinary fitness tracker which at least has some battery life?


Well, it is obviously part of their ecosystem (to which I am locked in to anyway), so the integration with my existing devices is much better than with 3rd party products. Plus there are watch compagnong apps for some of the iOS apps I use regularly (but not for all of them).
Editor
photozone.de

#14 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 14 September 2017 - 10:14 AM

Well, I bought (one of the 1000 accessories in my drawers) one of these sleeves with a wrist- or armband. Usually jogging people use them to carry their phones, but now they use more and more the wireless earplugs. In white they remind me on ear-tampons, maybe to stop the brain bleeding...  :lol:

 

I bought that sleeve set up a handsfree remote control with an iPod to my camera - that could be a use for the Apple watch, if the screen were not far too small to be useful. Anyway, I'm as well prisoner in Apple's ecosystem, I just don't swallow each shit they throw up. My life long complaint to Apple is: Bleeding money and at the same time abandoning a world class photo organisation software with a somehow decent RAW-converter to me is completely unforgiveable. Idiots and Losers are the nicer labels I have for Apple's management, totally incapable of innovation. They chew old meat to the bone.



#15 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 14 September 2017 - 10:37 AM

Actually, I just found the video o DPReview: https://www.dpreview...-what-they-seem

 

So, as great as these cameras are, take the results presented by their makers with two grains of salt  ^_^



#16 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 14 September 2017 - 10:57 AM

And what can Apple watch do better than any ordinary fitness tracker which at least has some battery life?

 

The number one thing that the Watch will do that ordinary fitness trackers won't do is to save lives.

 

I am absolutely certain that the Apple Watch is going to save tens of thousands of lives. How?

 

The new watch (not mine, not just yet) will come with Watch OS 4 and the all important heart monitoring app. The app not only tracks your heart rate but warns you when you are about to have a heart attack.

 

Yes, it learns over time what is and what is not normal for you. 

 

I'm sure you know that most people who die of a heart attack don't recognise the warning signs. But the Watch does and it says to you “Hey, you are about to die. You better do something”. Or something to this effect.

 

Other things that were only in the sci-fi films are now a reality. You can now make a cellular call without having your phone with you. Truly amazing, no?

 

And for those who have an understanding of their spouses, you can send each other your very own heart beats. Not a big deal to many, I'm sure. But I can tell you that the wife getting my heartbeat tells her about us in ways that needs no words.

 

The list goes on. Very soon, you will be able to pay at a check out by simply raising your watch at the cashiers, doing away with finding cards and fumbling with passcodes that we often forget.

 

But hey, people can remain skeptical. What can I say?

 

Oh, the Watch is telling me to stand. Think it's a gimmick? Ask yourself how often you take the time to stand for 1 minute every hour?


From the sunny side of the Alps.

#17 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 14 September 2017 - 11:28 AM

Andy, this post is too tempting! Hope you excuse me making some fun out of it (not of you, beware). As I know for sure that laughing more is definitely helping us for not getting heart attacks or -problems with that organ  :D 

 

The number one thing that the Watch will do that ordinary fitness trackers won't do is to save lives.
 
I am absolutely certain that the Apple Watch is going to save tens of thousands of lives. How?
 
The new watch (not mine, not just yet) will come with Watch OS 4 and the all important heart monitoring app. The app not only tracks your heart rate but warns you when you are about to have a heart attack.

 

A cardiologist told me that half the people getting a heart attack know it after they died. I just imagie me climbing some roads around Lake Bohinj, my watch tells me "hey you're about to die" and all I can think is "good to know, we all gonna die anyway, but the last f***ing thing I want to share this special moment with is a nosy watch.  :unsure:

 

Yes, it learns over time what is and what is not normal for you. 
 
I'm sure you know that most people who die of a heart attack don't recognise the warning signs. But the Watch does and it says to you “Hey, you are about to die. You better do something”. Or something to this effect.
 
Other things that were only in the sci-fi films are now a reality. You can now make a cellular call without having your phone with you. Truly amazing, no?
 
And for those who have an understanding of their spouses, you can send each other your very own heart beats. Not a big deal to many, I'm sure. But I can tell you that the wife getting my heartbeat tells her about us in ways that needs no words.

That's excellent, I gonna order a dozen. Does it come with or without spouse? And how do you know, or how does your wife know, she's looking forward to become a widow or your workout is a bit more stressful after three bottles of wine last night or you became excited, not to mention aroused by, say, a new lens, certain (maybe even female) people in swimwear or one of these intelligent and highly charming comments of me? I think there's still some room for improvements, don't you agree? Maybe I'll wait for the next generation. Just keep me posted.

 

The list goes on. Very soon, you will be able to pay at a check out by simply raising your watch at the cashiers, doing away with finding cards and fumbling with passcodes that we often forget.

With or without tipp? 

 

But hey, people can remain skeptical. What can I say?
 
Oh, the Watch is telling me to stand. Think it's a gimmick? Ask yourself how often you take the time to stand for 1 minute every hour?

 
Don't need to ask me that: My office desk moves from low (sitting) to high (standing) position in half second - and I'm a fanatic standing PC user, as thoughts are flowing better.  ;)


  • stoppingdown likes this

#18 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 14 September 2017 - 12:12 PM

This is great, of course, and has obviously saved a lot of lifes. However, it sometimes feels that it gives a false impression of safety to many driver

 

These are primary points. Let's add another: how many people will just relegate driving a car to the fact of moving fast from one place to another? How many potential driver champions will be lost, because they aren't aroused by a father whose driving style is more sport-oriented? Sport-oriented doesn't mean driving at 200km/h: it maybe just the matter of using a manual gear in place of an automated one...

 

(Now, I reckon this specific example has got a strong limit: we still have plenty of driver champions, because in the end there is a very limited number of places to allocate - e.g. F1 drivers can't be but a few dozens. But just imagine that this specific limit doesn't exist...).

 

And are we sure Hamilton or Vettel are champions of the same stuff as those in the past? Sure, they deliver. But, personally, I'm getting more and more bored by a F1 competition (and I've even worked in that field, a few years ago) hearing the discussions being more and more focused on technical stuff, being electronics or tires - or the rules, which are forced to be more and more complex - rather than the genuine skill of the driver.


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#19 Studor13

Studor13

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 14 September 2017 - 12:39 PM

This thread is more confusing than playing Chinese whispers.

 

I remember in High School a game started with “Dominic wears glasses and has a gold watch”. By the time it went around the classroom it was something like “Dominic hates the iPhone X bokeh and lost his Apple Watch”.

 

Humm, now the Watch is telling me to breathe. Like, I don't know how to breathe!


  • JoJu likes this
From the sunny side of the Alps.

#20 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 14 September 2017 - 01:00 PM

I'm sure there's an app for this.

 

Which tells your watch not to tell you how to breathe after you confirmed to know how to do.


  • Studor13 likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de