Hacker News Reader

Comment by steckerbrett | Hacker News Reader

The multi aperture thing doesn't make much sense, it appears to have multiple lenses which will have debilitating parallax error due to the positioning. I don't see how that's possible. I'm also struggling to see why they laid out the sensors in such a non geometric pattern too.

View on HN

Parallax could be corrected by software as long as the subject isn't too close. You might lose a little detail around the edges but with enough redundancy it's probably not a big deal

In their examples there's a macro photo of a chess board.

Yeah, it does look a little funky around the edges of the pieces in the background, but surprisingly not the foreground: https://www.dropbox.com/s/o4rx62fjo63nvk4/Screenshot%202015-...

https://light.co/content/2-gallery/gallery_modal_05.jpg

You're right, that's like no lens blur I've ever seen.

It's a lot like an unsharp-mask halo though

Right. Also surprising how much fine noise there is in the background — it ‘should be’ out of focus enough there there would be nearly no noise at all…

If you look closely at that photo, the result is really weird. The black pieces behind the plane of focus have very uncertain positions that the software didn't bother fixing. It's bokeh, in a way. A horrible way.

Yup, it's not nice. Headache inducing.

I think that's just a zoomed up picture with low depth of field. I'm not a photographer so correct me if I'm wrong. The chess pieces in the background look still quite big compared to the pieces in the front. It suggests that the photo was taken from around 30-40 cm.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com