Sony Ericsson patent app takes the tedium out of zooming your camera

It's a beautiful autumn day, and you're out in the wooded path beyond the railroad tracks just taking it all in and killing some time. Hey, what's that? Why, it's the cutest bunny rabbit you've ever seen! Time to pull out that 8-megapixel C905 and... oh, this sucks, you actually have to press a button to zoom in and out! Screw this noise -- you're a visionary photographer, not a manual laborer. Happily, Sony Ericsson feels your pain, and a new patent application reveals that they're hard at work on a system to control your cameraphone's zoom level simply by moving it back and forth. Just get the phone closer to the subject, and boom, welcome to telephoto city, population one. We're still totally cool with the old-fashioned way of capturing Pulitzer-winning shots, but we're happy that someone's thinking of this type of stuff so we don't have to -- that'd be work.

[Via Unwired View]

[Josh @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:01AM]

Because pressing a button is too damn hard.

[Twitchy @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:50AM]

Less buttons = less buttons = less crevices for dust etc. to enter a device.

[LondonConsultant @ Oct 3rd 2008 4:35AM]

The main patent claims seem to be for automatically zooming in/out so that the subject remains the same size in the frame - despite the photographer/subject moving closer or further away. That seems a pretty useful function, especially for sports photography. Add it to a camcorder and I'm sold...

[Ricardo @ Oct 3rd 2008 6:52AM]

Not, it's easy, that's why all prosumer and professional cameras have zoom buttons.

Oh, sorry, never mind, they don't.

[BigD145 @ Oct 3rd 2008 11:38AM]

Consumer products that take control away from the consumer are all crap. Don't tell me how to live my life, you corporate honkies.

[konshuss @ Oct 3rd 2008 2:40PM]

@Twitchy

who said there would be less buttons, fanboy? this is a feature in ADDITION to what's already available, not a replacement you are forced to deal with.

[Wwhat @ Oct 3rd 2008 2:49PM]

You seem to be right LondonConsultant so that means that unwiredview.com are total idiots in describing it, or they linked the wrong story to the wrong patent, what idiots.

But either way, now that it's patented nobody will want to pay the ridiculous sony license fees and it will either never be used or only on sony products, patents are such good news aren't they?

[Twitchy @ Oct 4th 2008 9:10AM]

I'm sorry Konshuss, but what? Me saying less buttons on a pocket-able device is a good thing makes me a Sony fanboi? Interesting leap in your logic there - I was just pointing out what I deemed to be a positive aspect of such a feature.

[atimchula @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:04AM]

Can't you already do this with...every camera ever? I know that if I move my current camera

Before you lambast me, I get it, I'm joking

[EmoChicksAreHot.....Seriously @ Oct 3rd 2008 10:40AM]

i was thinking the same thing.if you have room to move the camera back and forth then just get closer to the object.

[Ethan @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:04AM]

So by moving the phone closer, everything gets bigger? How the heck did they think of that? Whenever I get closer to something, it's always smaller...

[Ethan @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:05AM]

I've been beaten. D:

[atimchula @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:06AM]

Sorry, forgot a word, add 'zooms' to the end of the first line

[eggothewaffle @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:07AM]

I now spend my days reading Engadget articles and trying to guess which ones were written by Chris Ziegler.

This time, I guessed right :']

[Chris Ziegler @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:24AM]

Should I be creeped out?

[Poom @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:29AM]

So do you like his articles? I don't really know which is his, but I like how this article is written.

[eggothewaffle @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:34AM]

Poom: Hell yeah, this article is awesome. I loved the bit about the cutest bunny rabbit and then the mildly sardonic and self-deprecating closer "...but we're happy that someone's thinking of this type of stuff so we don't have to -- that'd be work."

Chris: No, please don't be freaked out. Even from my vantage point behind your backyard shrubs, I can see the added tension's going to do a *number* on your upper back. Just remember, a professional massage is only a shout-to-your-rustling-backyard-shrubs away...

...I really need to finish my biochem lab report :'[

[Poom @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:46AM]

=) Yep, I agree.

[EricR @ Oct 3rd 2008 9:22AM]

sure is one HOT bunny rabbit -- looks like he zoomed back in time..to the 70s

[Mitch @ Oct 3rd 2008 3:23AM]

Love the patent graphics. Check out that coat!

[Ken @ Oct 3rd 2008 10:11AM]

For real!

I wish more people put as much effort into their apps.

[Ken @ Oct 3rd 2008 10:12AM]

by "apps" I meant patent applications

[Rob Bourne @ Oct 3rd 2008 4:02AM]

For a minute there I had to make sure it wasn't April 1st.

[Stranger @ Oct 3rd 2008 4:31AM]

I would say this is a really sweet idea. Why should we be bothered with buttons to zoom in or out when a simple back- or forward motion is sufficient. Instead of moving 3 meters, just move the phone 30 cm. I know what I would consider the easiest solution.

[Duoae @ Oct 3rd 2008 4:47AM]

Except there's have to be a way to turn it off because most people don't have such a steady hand and could be slightly zooming back and forth if the movement scale was small enough...

[Stranger @ Oct 3rd 2008 5:41AM]

Which can easily be solved by letting the camera only zoom in or out when the phone is moved a certain minimum distance, for example 3 cm back or forth.

[Shinigami @ Oct 3rd 2008 4:48AM]

Wow! Instead of actually adding optical zoom, they made a patent to make your pictures look even more crappish by enabling auto-digital zooming so you can have a reason to say "its not the camera thats bad, its the digital zoom that makes it look bad!"

Hope this never gets into phones or at least gets there as a disable-able option.

[Poom @ Oct 3rd 2008 5:08AM]

How would this make the quality worse than normal digital zoom? Also... this can also be used for optical zoom as well. ??? It's just a method of input. It has nothing to do with picture quality. Your comment makes no sense.

[meemo @ Oct 3rd 2008 4:56AM]

so i guess when taking a photo out of a moving train I will be pretty close to everything. wait, what?...

[lara @ Oct 3rd 2008 5:39AM]

'cutest bunny rabbit' - yet it's an image of a woman??? lol

Do we really need more and more features added to cameras??? stop this madness!!

[Ricardo @ Oct 3rd 2008 6:54AM]

My phone does that, when you get closer to something it zooms in. My eyes do that too.

[Technex @ Oct 3rd 2008 7:14AM]

Wow, now your digital zoom will look just a crap!

[Maxx @ Oct 3rd 2008 12:03PM]

No sale. This would most likely effect my upskirt shots. LOL

[Dolemike @ Oct 3rd 2008 12:17PM]

Funny. Didn't Microsoft already announce this a a feature to Windows Mobile 7?

[Super S @ Oct 3rd 2008 1:44PM]

This one seems a little odd to me. When you move the camera forward, it zooms in? That works with all cameras, technically, you move the camera forward (closer to the object), and poof! magic, it gets bigger. It's called perspective.

I understand that with this it is meaning it registers little movements and makes the zoom for you, but I picture it being pretty inaccurate.

[Faisal @ Oct 3rd 2008 2:44PM]

Judging from the patent, it seems like what this allows you to do is "lock" onto a scene, after which subsequent movements toward or away from the scene are compensated for by changing the zoom level. E.g. if you lock the scene with your frame containing an orange on the left and a bowl on the right, even moving forward will keep the orange and bowl in the picture, since the camera will detect the movement and zoom out accordingly.

Anyone have other opinions on it?

[Faisal @ Oct 3rd 2008 2:50PM]

Actually, never mind; it's exactly what you've all been saying. I guess it exaggerates the movements that you make toward the scene as increasing the zoom, and away from the scene as decreasing the zoom. I suppose I can chalk up my lack of understanding to the excessively pedantic wording of the patent.

Meh, that's pretty lame. Too bad it's not what I was thinking, as it'd make doing depth of field shots a little easier.

[Wwhat @ Oct 3rd 2008 2:51PM]

Yeah you are right, those unwiredview people are fools, and engadget trusted them, o well, we all make trust-based mistakes from time to time.

[magnus @ Oct 5th 2008 2:42PM]

..howcome as soon as someone tries to think out of the box just a little bit most articles and comments on this site shoots it down?