Will this be the Siri of the iPhone 5S? A feature that involves software only yet inexplicably requires the newest hardware?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Aims to Prevent Blurry or Underexposed iPhone Photos with Automatic Image Buffering and Comparison
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple needs optical image stabilization
Don't need to waste cpu power on multiple shots if they just had optical image stabilization on their cameras. The results should be MUCH better as well.
Nikon is getting 4-stops improvement through their VR technology.
That means they can shoot in 1/15 second to get a shot that looks as sharp as 1/240.
Nokia is doing well with their new Lumia camera with stabilization.
Don't need to waste cpu power on multiple shots if they just had optical image stabilization on their cameras. The results should be MUCH better as well.
Nikon is getting 4-stops improvement through their VR technology.
That means they can shoot in 1/15 second to get a shot that looks as sharp as 1/240.
Nokia is doing well with their new Lumia camera with stabilization.
I take action photos which suffer from washout from bright light (rocket). A variation of this that allowed selecting among a couple dozen candidate stills and being able to capture, say, ignition, liftoff, maximum thrust, and other brief moment events would be a value add to the buffered images.
Right. Because the Windows desktop OS, and Blackberry 10 home screen look nothing like things Apple already had on the market..
I'm crap at taking photos and I wonder how hard would it be to implement a feature similar to the burst shots that certain cameras have... like 15 pics taken in a sec or so. That would be awesome (and would please any parent trying to get a photo of their kid smiling 
)
)
The patent application was filed in October of last year but references an earlier application filed in 2009
Galaxy S3 existed in 2009?
This must be a pretty specific part of the algorithm technology that Apple are trying to patent as this sort of thing has been around for a long time. Most point and shoot cameras take a bunch of shots without you knowing, and 'build' a photo from them. It's always been sold as 'image stabilisation' but in reality its just images being taken in sequence to get the best shot.
I think I'd be wary of such a feature. I take pictures all the time of my kids, friends, dog, etc. Getting everyone to look at the camera at the same time or with eyes open is a real pain. I'm not sure I want an algorithm choosing to keep the best photo at the expense of what I mentioned above. EVEN WITH the ability to accept or reject, if I'm shooting a bunch of photos all at once (say at my kids sporting events) I may not have time to review and choose the one I want to keep. I'm not sure there's a great way to get around these issues other than perhaps to have an 'on-off' toggle or to have the ability to always to photos in this mode and then be able to decide at a later time which one to keep.
Siri + Pictures
The problem sounds like it occurs when the user pushes a button to take a picture, throwing the camera off and distorting the image so why not eliminate this step and allow the user to speak to Siri by saying something along the lines of "take picture" and you will not have to touch the screen and shake the camera.
The problem sounds like it occurs when the user pushes a button to take a picture, throwing the camera off and distorting the image so why not eliminate this step and allow the user to speak to Siri by saying something along the lines of "take picture" and you will not have to touch the screen and shake the camera.
Missing The Point
I think what you're all missing is that Apple are patenting THEIR version and algorithm to make this work.
Irregardless of who got their first - if the Apple method of doing it is markedly better than anything else then they have the right to patent it so others can't simply copy the same methodology algorithm that might make it so much better.
I think what you're all missing is that Apple are patenting THEIR version and algorithm to make this work.
Irregardless of who got their first - if the Apple method of doing it is markedly better than anything else then they have the right to patent it so others can't simply copy the same methodology algorithm that might make it so much better.
It's clever, but it prevents the user from learning good technique.
Wouldn't it be better to let them make a few mistakes first? They'd soon learn learn to hold the camera steady and caress the shutter.
Wouldn't it be better to let them make a few mistakes first? They'd soon learn learn to hold the camera steady and caress the shutter.
Oh Apple... Your late to the game patents are Futile.
Instead, make that mid 2000's OS and UI modern. I laugh every time I grab an iPhone with that "innovative" grid of icons and android notification pull down.
Instead, make that mid 2000's OS and UI modern. I laugh every time I grab an iPhone with that "innovative" grid of icons and android notification pull down.
It's a patent application from 2009. So if the patent is granted, and some smartphone camera has done exactly what the patent says three years ago, they'll need a patent license.
Are you serious? That patent DOES cover the keyboard and was filed nearly a YEAR BEFORE Microsoft even announced the surface.
Read about it here: https://www.macrumors.com/2012/08/02/apple-researching-ipad-smart-covers-with-secondary-displays-keyboards-solar-cells/
Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that Microsoft is actually licensing these patents from Apple. They didn't innovatethey licensed the patents. Got it? Because that's a HUGE difference.
You can read about that here: https://www.macrumors.com/2012/08/13/apple-has-licensed-ios-design-patents-to-microsoft-agreement-bans-cloning/
To everyone:
It seems that many of you don't understand that while we're only just now hearing about these patents, they're often filed much further in the past. Use your heads! The proper way to conduct business in this country is R&D, patent to protect said R&D and future product production (which have costs!), then either produce a product or license the patents. Like it or not, that's generally how it works. And until that isn't how it works, that's how Apple will conduct business. And you'd be crazy to argue that they should do otherwisethey're one of the most successful companies in the world! If they don't do it a competitor will. But yes random posters on the internet, you've got it all figured out. If only Apple did what YOU said then they would somehow be five times more successful. RIGHT.
I think the patent for a smart cover predates the Microsoft smart cover by a few years. Microsoft probably licensed the patent from Apple before releasing their cover. However this imaging patent is very close to features already common place when this patent was lodged. If the patent office grant this they are completely useless.
These days it seems everyone thinks they're patent experts and within a few minutes of reading a summary here can say with certainty whether the patent should be granted or not. Amazing.
I wonder why no one implements this technique:
http://www.google.ca/patents/US20070098383
It is pretty feasible with current technology and, if robust deblur examples on the net are any indication, pretty effective at removing blur.
http://www.google.ca/patents/US20070098383
It is pretty feasible with current technology and, if robust deblur examples on the net are any indication, pretty effective at removing blur.