Hats off to him, it's a great story.
I would image Apple have bought his company and hired him too ?
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
Hats off to him, it's a great story.
I would image Apple have bought his company and hired him too ?
Yes, because only DSLRs are allowed to use studio lighting![]()
Pretty deceptive images there, those were obviously shot with a full frame DSLR with in the case of the dog, a long lens and large aperture, and in the case of the baby, studio lighting. No way in hell you will ever get images like that out of a phone camera.
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.
Why the heck is it that whenever Apple acquires the maker of an app, they immediately pull the app from the store?
It's not like it costs Apple anything to have the app in the store, and hey, if people keep buying it, Apple gets to keep ALL the money instead of just 30%!
This happens every single time. Apple buys company, app is pulled before the announcement even hits. WTF? Why, Apple?
I'm guessing it will be incorporated into the free camera app and Apple doesn't want to have people complaining about paying for something that later becomes free.
Seriously?![]()
because it will be part of the native app in the future. That apple will make part of major release.
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.
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.
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!
My point wasn't that the shoot was efficient; it might have taken many, many sequences to capture that single image
... 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
What you're thinking of is JIT (Just In Time) recompilation. This is a technique used by a lot of emulators to dynamically recompile machine code from one architecture to another, then run it on the host CPU natively. It's how emulators like Dolphin (Mac & Win) and PPSSPP (Mac, iOS, Android, Blackberry, and Windows) work.
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.
Oh, I've always wondered why Nintendo emulators are not allowed. I assumed it was just because Nintendo would complain.
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.
Nope - their only aim is to please their shareholders by "persuading" owners of "old" models to purchase the new model.
It looks like they used assembly language to tune the JPEG compression perfectly for the iPhone processor. Even C, as I have found from Googling, cannot achieve the precision of assembly language sometimes.
----------
'Cause ew, assembly language is like so not object-oriented. Translation: So few people actually care about efficiency anymore, and for some reason they only know about object-oriented programming.
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.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.
acquisitions and the resulting internal modification & implementation are the definition of innovation. this guy is now an apple employee and his features will be incorporated in future products. when they do, no reviewer will put an asterisk next to the new feature and say "* This came from acquisition"...because doing so would be insane.
do you know what apple bought in order to mass produce multitouch? no, and nobody cares. we only care about the finished product.
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.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.
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.