Apple Acquires SnappyLabs, Maker of SnappyCam Burst Photo App [Confirmed]

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jan 4, 2014.

  1. Tiger8 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    #76
    Typically when a giant company buys out a one man band LLC, yea, it involves a handsome sum of money and an offer for employment
     
  2. winston1236 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    #77
    His point is nobody sets up studio lighting and then uses a cheap iPhone camera to take pictures, you would use a professional quality camera.
     
  3. TMay, Jan 5, 2014
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2014

    TMay macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Location:
    Carson City, NV
    #78
    Evidence?

    The action shot looks like a f2.2 (wide open) 33mm equivalent focal length of the 5s but maybe it's a 5, hand picked from a large collection of "action shots" staged right in front of the iPhone, mounted on a tripod I would guess. Crappy bokeh for a dslr don't you think? The grass looks like mush.

    The baby photo is completely feasible with a tripod for the iPhone and a few light boxes. We should be able to see the reflections of the light boxes in the eyes at high resolution (they are there but low res). DOF doesn't look all that shallow.

    But of course, we can't really tell all that much because we don't have the originals, and those images are very low res.

    Not saying that iPhones are better than dslr's for imaging, they aren't, just that people tend to have a perception bias towards their preferred tools. You might want to keep an open mind.
     
  4. PCWilliams macrumors newbie

    PCWilliams

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2014
    Location:
    Miami
    #79
    Yes, I would say so! :D
     
  5. rstone3 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest
    #80
    I would be VERY surprised if the dog image was created in anything less than a DSLR with a long lens at f2.8 or better. I think it would be nearly impossible to stage the dog close enough to a lesser system such as an "iPhone on a tripod" - not really sure how that would work in any case though I suspect that there are cases which would allow mooting the iPhone (or use some duct tape?) Getting the dog to jump to the exact right spot and hoping focus will be there are the other obstacles. My current set up could do it 5D3 / 70-200 f/2.8 IS "L" lens. This sort of stuff (dogs) are a frequent subject for me and only the long lens works. The baby picture I think is possible with an iPhone with some diffuse natural light - even a sheet over a window could do it as another post mentions.

    All this is not too criticize the iPhone camera - which in good light does the job (minus the bokeh and useable pixels) and is certainly more portable than the DSLR!
     
  6. PollyK macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    #81
    Let's just go with facts. All we know is Apple buys from App Store, Apple removes from app store, and the consumer looses (unless you buy their new iDevice.)
    Otherwise Apple would do what Google just did with Timely. They bought Timely, kept it in the Play Store and made it free and all in app purchases absolutely free. That's how you do things for the better of the consumer immediately. Thank you Google.
     
  7. Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #82
    It's absolutely impossible an 1/3" sensor + f/2.2 lens (that of the 5s) could produce such shallow DoF. (And the, DoF shallowness-wise, even-worse 1/3.2" sensor + f/2.4 lens of the 5 is even worse.) It's not even possible in macro mode - and this image certainly has a focus point of at least 2-3 metres.

    ----------

    Apple's upgrade / feature-addition practice really couldn't be compared to that of Google. The latter is far more consumer-friendly.

    Let's face it: Apple is highly unlikely to add some major camera speedup to current models in future firmware upgrades. They are likely to use the just-purchased tech in their future models only. This was also a reason for their removing the app from the AppStore - not to let people not having purchased the app stick with, say, the iPhone 5 (instead of upgrading to the 5s) if they want to make burst shots.
     
  8. TMay macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Location:
    Carson City, NV
    #83
    My point wasn't that the shoot was efficient; it might have taken many, many sequences to capture that single image. BTW, there are many case mount systems; even Really Right Stuff makes some.
     
  9. Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #84

    ... on a camera with at least an 1" sensor and with a comparatively bright lens. Or, with a superzoom, way over 300-400 mm to decrease the DoF.

    But definitely not any of the iPhones. Not even the 5s is capable of so shallow DoF, let alone older, smaller-sensored and slower-lens (=darker) models.
     
  10. TMay macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Location:
    Carson City, NV
    #85
    Shoot a frisbee / plate that is about 8 to 9 inches diameter with an iPhone 5 or 5s so that it has about the same relationship as the frisbee in the photo. I did that. The distance is probably closer to 1.5 m, giving narrower DOF.
     
  11. Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #86
    It's pitch dark in here (I'm in Europe) but, tomorrow, I'll shot some shots on the iPhone 5. (The dog image is dated before Sept/2013 so it can't be made by the 5s.) Now, I could only present you with NR-smeared images. (I'm travelling and don't have the necessary indoors light to go under ISO640 at 1/15s here in the hotel. And I don't have a tripod either so that I could go for an ISO100 shot with a shutter speed of even 1s.)

    I'm, nevertheless, absolutely sure the left image just can't be made with the iPhone 5 (not even the the-unavailable 5s) - it has too shallow DoF.
     
  12. TMay macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Location:
    Carson City, NV
    #87
    I too am experimenting. What I notice is that I have to shoot in lower light to get the aperture to shoot at f2.2, and that gives DOF but it it isn't pretty.

    What are the parameters for macro to kick in? Any idea.
     
  13. Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #88
    The 5s - as with almost all other phones, including even the mighty Nokia 808 and 1020 - has fixed aperture. (See for example THIS for proof: "The 5s’ F2.2 lens is within a negligible quarter stop of the fastest phone lenses on the market, so it gets about as much light on the sensor as anything out there. With the aperture fixed, when light levels drop it’s a matter of lengthening shutter speeds and raising sensitivity (ISO) to get a usable exposure.")

    There isn't a separately enable-able macro mode (only for third-party apps, which, via a new API call, can force the AF to start hunting in either the macro or the "remote" area). Shots taken at even 2-3 cm are OK.
     
  14. DodgeV83 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    #89
    I wouldn't waste your time. It's clearly not possible. Maybe if he used an app like BigLens or AfterFocus to edit the photo after the fact, but not straight from the camera.
     
  15. msephton, Jan 5, 2014
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2014

    msephton macrumors 6502

    msephton

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Cornwall, UK
    #90
    This guy rocks!

    I'm really interested in seeing where his technology is used.

    And I wonder if his JPEG optimisations were only for speed, or whether he implemented better file size optimisations? In a similar way to the Israeli startup http://www.jpegmini.com

    The amount of bandwidth that could be saved is astonishing. It could speed up the internet for all of us.
     
  16. N64 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2013
    Location:
    Lost Woods
    #91
    Oh, I've always wondered why Nintendo emulators are not allowed. I assumed it was just because Nintendo would complain. Is YACC (Yet Another Compiler Compiler) banned?

    ----------

    Yeah, I don't know why your comment is causing so much anger. It's true. They buy something then remove it from the store. That's just what happens.

    I'm guessing it's because the feature will be added in the next iOS anyway, and there's no reason to give it to people with older iPhones. Plus it's just kinda weird and unprofessional to keep selling it on the store. People would probably complain more that Apple is charging extra to use the feature than if they just quietly removed the app.
     
  17. Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #92
    Nope. Apple just want to defend their lucrative AppStore business; hence the ban for all kinds of emulators.

    It's ridiculous even DOS emulators, with very limited gaming capabilities, are banned.

    ----------

    Typical for Apple's greed, I'd say. While both Google and Microsoft (Nokia), for most of the time, make sure their latest-and-greatest features do work on older hardware as well. Apple in no way would please owners of "old" models with new functionality those phones could easily deliver - as is the case with action shooting on even the 4S. Nope - their only aim is to please their shareholders by "persuading" owners of "old" models to purchase the new model.
     
  18. N64, Jan 5, 2014
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2014

    N64 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2013
    Location:
    Lost Woods
    #93
    Google and Microsoft, as well as every public company, aim to please the shareholders. It's just that Google's and Microsoft's business models are different and call for spreading software, not hardware.

    So if you buy an iPhone, beware that Apple will probably hate you if you keep it for more than 3 years. Kinda like that with Macs too. Mavericks, I think, was just BS to phase out older computers. It's free for a reason. But also keep in mind what Google and Microsoft want and how they'll do it if you use their stuff. These companies are too predictable.
     
  19. aafuss1 macrumors 68000

    aafuss1

    Joined:
    May 5, 2002
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Australia
    #94
    Personally, I'd love to see Snappycsm technology used in a future iOS version, perhaps Apple could use it to adapt the burst speed when capturing burst mode photos as it's really swift and make use of its image compression tech.

    Other phone makers like Nokia for instance in their Nokia Camera app allow you to have control over shutter speed via a ring interface plus the ability to change face, remove objects form captured photos plus a Lytro like refocus tech in Nokia Refocus-something not offered in the Apple camera app.

    This adds to the complexity of the app, something Apple wouldn't do as they favour ease of use. Though some Nokia WP8 devices now offer DNG recording.



    Still able to redownload SnapppyCam, though how long Apple will allow this since they've acquired it is anyone's guess.
     
  20. KdParker macrumors 601

    KdParker

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Location:
    Everywhere
    #95
    I can see that for some fine tuning.
     
  21. SgtPepper12 macrumors 6502a

    SgtPepper12

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #96
    Actually not impressive at all, tbh. I looked at the examples on that page and I would never say that both pictures are the same quality. There's noticeably more blockiness/blurriness in the JPEGmini variants. Of course it's not visible if you use gigantic photographs which are not perfectly sharp anyway. For most web scenarios this is just not typical. You usually have much more detailed graphics.

    Also I'd like to see how JPG/JPGmini files compare at the same file size. I am very sure the improvement is hardly visible.
     
  22. captain kaos macrumors 65816

    captain kaos

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney
    #97
    Oh darn it, that was a great app. As soon as i read the developers background, someone that designed and sold his new tech for taking noise from ADSL lines, then redesigned JPEG algorithms, i knew it wouldn't be long till apple bought him out.
     
  23. bretm macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2002
    #98
    Finger works. Everyone knows that. It was a pretty important acquisition.
     
  24. msephton macrumors 6502

    msephton

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Cornwall, UK
    #99
    I disagree that there are visible differences. So would JPEGmini as they've scientifically proved it whilst creating their software. It's not Save For Web they're doing, it's something much more intelligent.

    See an image of the differences between to photos here: http://apertureexpert.squarespace.com/tips/2013/2/22/jpegmini-can-it-be-used-to-reduce-your-aperture-library.html

    Hint: it's the totally black image
     
  25. djgamble macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    #100
    Those who use iOS 7 have known for ~6 months that Apple has ALREADY implemented the code into their camera app. My iPhone 4S magically takes 20 photos per second (trust me, you feel it as soon as you upgrade to iOS 7 and try taking a photo). There's no 'saving' wait time after taking multiple photos. Up until this acquisition was known about, this was just iOS 7 'magic' that nobody said much about. We just knew that iOS 7 significantly spend up the camera app...

    This explains how Apple achieved these speed gains. They bought out a guy who made a clever new algorithm and used his algorithm in their own app.

    Grab your brand new quad-core Android and compare the speed of taking burst photos to a 3 year old iPhone 4S which has been upgraded to iOS 7 (for free, promptly... rather than when/if the carrier allows the upgrade like some competing distribution platforms). You'll notice that the 4S is now faster at taking full-res burst photos...

    Now THAT is customer friendly!! Free seamless upgrade (even for old phones) 6 months before people even knew that Apple had purchased the company.
     

Share This Page