http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/ Engadget Comments for http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 2:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 6:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 9:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 7th 2009 6:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/
And why would you spend $800 on a base camera without knowing anything about it? Surely the no-flash thing would have been one of the first things you notice. Someone is not smart here. ]]>Sep 6th 2009 2:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 2:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/

"Nikon learned FLASH!" Doo-dee-doo!]]>Sep 6th 2009 2:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/With Phase One being the only pockets available, i wish they'd release something with less megapixels, opensource, add features whenever you want, and properly compete with the likes of Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc...
How else are they gonna survive... fps and megapixels?]]>Sep 6th 2009 2:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 7th 2009 7:29AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 7th 2009 11:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/
So when you are taking pictures in low light, you put the flash on the camera. Otherwise, you take it off.

It's just not the same as a cameraphone.]]>Sep 6th 2009 1:46PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 2:03PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/
And why would you spend $800 on a base camera without knowing anything about it? Surely the no-flash thing would have been one of the first things you notice. Someone is not smart here.
]]>Sep 6th 2009 2:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/
Considering the level of his comment I can easily belive that he did.]]>Sep 6th 2009 2:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 2:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 8th 2009 1:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 2:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 3:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 4:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/
It is a hacked Canon firmware that runs on almost all the PnS ones. Yes, the SLRs are proprietary, but that is a political limitation not a technical one.

As for swapping out sensors, I believe I read somewhere about a camera that already did that. Was it the RED?]]>Sep 6th 2009 1:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 2:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 3:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/
check em out at red.com, I don't work for them or anything, I just love their product philosophy and their attitude. ]]>Sep 6th 2009 6:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/.]]>Sep 6th 2009 10:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/They could at least have acknowledged that it was an extension of the CHDK idea instead of pretending that doesn't exists, because this time I'm 100% convinced they know about CHDK.
]]>Sep 6th 2009 10:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 7th 2009 10:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/camera-2.0/)

However, while CHDK is quite useful, it is fairly limited - what if we want a new autoexposure algorithm, say to optimize the exposures needed for an HDR shot? What if we want to detect camera motion by looking at subsequent camera frames to help with panorama capture? And so on - these aren't things CHDK can do. If we could do everything we wanted on CHDK, why would we be spending all this effort on building on our stuff?

A few other points, while I'm here - this is a research platform, so size is a secondary issue (still, we'd like it smaller) as long as it's portable. We aren't out to beat RED (or any current commercial camera), although maybe one day the API we hope to create would run on a RED as well. The prototype specs will be good enough to take reasonable photos, to serve as a demonstration platform for all the interesting algorithm we (and hopefully many others) will come up with. It's not a commercial product.

We also hope to experiment with the user interface, with flexible buttons, etc on the prototype body.

-Eddy Talvala (one of the graduate students on the project)]]>Sep 7th 2009 2:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/
Mobile phones are already doing what they're doing, in the commercial space. Sure, the optics are horrible and the sensor is small, but you've got a half gigahertz CPU and soon a GPU, on Android if you want it. Much more open to innovation at layers above processing the raw sensor data.]]>Sep 7th 2009 5:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/
But for pictures of that tree in my backyard with the funky looking branches that I want to upload to the internet my digital camera works great.]]>Sep 6th 2009 1:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 2:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 3:08PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 4:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/

J/K (obviously|)
]]>Sep 6th 2009 10:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/
LOL

EOM]]>Sep 6th 2009 1:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 3:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/06/stanfords-open-source-camera-initiative-could-revolutionize-pho/Sep 6th 2009 1:52PM