What the future is going to bring
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Flowers
Next: What have you photographed with your camera so far,that's helped you solve a mystery ?
From: Paul Furman on 13 Jun 2010 12:15 Robert Coe wrote: > We can only hope that you'll take your medications I don't think the meth is helping :-( Dudley was into photography when his vision was better, so he has an idea what's involved and another objective is he hopes to have his vision corrected in the future and to be able to look back at his photos of his life, so if nothing else, it's worth figuring out how to take decent pictures for that reason.
From: Peter on 13 Jun 2010 12:53 "Paul Furman" <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote in message news:SeidnXX6NNBI94nRnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > Dudley Hanks wrote: >> Haven't been following this thread since the beginning, so this might >> already have been mentioned... >> >> Given that in-lense stabilization has been around for a while and seems >> to >> work quite well, I'm wondering if we might see in-lens perspective >> correction in the future. Or, maybe it's already in use but I haven't >> come >> across it... >> >> It seems that the ability to do tilt-and-shift could be tied in with the >> lens stabilization mechanism (considerably beefed up, of course), and the >> lens could compensate (within certain limited parameters) to provide a >> nice >> straight image... > > That would work but it would be impractical (expensive) to make a wide > angle lens with a large enough image circle and would take a lot stronger > gyro/motors to move it that far.. although, hmm, it would be the very same > motion, just a lot more travel. > > It would be interesting to see that idea implemented in a video with a > tilt (pan up or down) that kept the verticals vertical using a stabilized > shift lens. It might look more like panning across a still shot though > I'll bet it's been done, cinematographers can be very clever and > sophisticated and have the budget. That type of gyro already exists. They are very heavy, but work. They were originally designed to stabilize optical observation from helicopters and tanks. Later they were adapted for use with video cameras. The only major improvement since I last tried one in 1977, is much lighter batteries. They are not really suitable for everyday photography. -- Peter
From: Dudley Hanks on 13 Jun 2010 13:04 "Paul Furman" <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote in message news:MumdnZ_PQ9aimYjRnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > Robert Coe wrote: >> We can only hope that you'll take your medications > > I don't think the meth is helping :-( > > Dudley was into photography when his vision was better, so he has an idea > what's involved and another objective is he hopes to have his vision > corrected in the future and to be able to look back at his photos of his > life, so if nothing else, it's worth figuring out how to take decent > pictures for that reason. Well stated, Paul... Take Care, Dudley
From: Dudley Hanks on 13 Jun 2010 13:15 "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message news:2010061310131217709-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... > On 2010-06-13 09:53:36 -0700, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> said: > >> "Paul Furman" <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote in message >> news:SeidnXX6NNBI94nRnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >>> Dudley Hanks wrote: >>>> Haven't been following this thread since the beginning, so this might >>>> already have been mentioned... >>>> >>>> Given that in-lense stabilization has been around for a while and seems >>>> to >>>> work quite well, I'm wondering if we might see in-lens perspective >>>> correction in the future. Or, maybe it's already in use but I haven't >>>> come >>>> across it... >>>> >>>> It seems that the ability to do tilt-and-shift could be tied in with >>>> the >>>> lens stabilization mechanism (considerably beefed up, of course), and >>>> the >>>> lens could compensate (within certain limited parameters) to provide a >>>> nice >>>> straight image... >>> >>> That would work but it would be impractical (expensive) to make a wide >>> angle lens with a large enough image circle and would take a lot >>> stronger gyro/motors to move it that far.. although, hmm, it would be >>> the very same motion, just a lot more travel. >>> >>> It would be interesting to see that idea implemented in a video with a >>> tilt (pan up or down) that kept the verticals vertical using a >>> stabilized shift lens. It might look more like panning across a still >>> shot though I'll bet it's been done, cinematographers can be very clever >>> and sophisticated and have the budget. >> >> >> That type of gyro already exists. They are very heavy, but work. They >> were originally designed to stabilize optical observation from >> helicopters and tanks. Later they were adapted for use with video >> cameras. The only major improvement since I last tried one in 1977, is >> much lighter batteries. They are not really suitable for everyday >> photography. > > I thinke the Kenyon Labs stabilizers are what you are talking about. > http://www.ken-lab.com/index.html > > > -- > Regards, > > Savageduck > Now, the challenge is to put the system into a P&S ... :) Take Care, Dudley
From: LOL! on 13 Jun 2010 13:57
On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:35:30 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: > > >You're batting about .000 You have that backward (like that's any surprise). You forget, we've seen your random crapshots that prove you 100% wrong about everything you just typed. But you go ahead, keep deluding yourself into thinking you're the next Da Vinci. "Film at 11: A blind person was found on the internet desperately trying to use a camera and claims he's as talented as Da Vinci or Beethoven. Every last one of his photos being blurry, badly exposed, tilted, or subjects with missing body parts cropped-out because he can't even aim his fully automatic camera properly at easy to detect subjects, only proves he's as nutty as a fruitcake. Social services has been contacted to see about getting him the mental-health treatment he requires." LOL! |