Talk:Lytro

Description of plenoptic technology
In earlier versions of the article there was a description of the main features of a Lytro camera. As those features were in fact shared by all plentoptic cameras, I re-cast the text to make it generic. In this recent edit, 220.233.44.239 deleted the entire Technology section because plenoptic photography already has its own article. Of course, that's a perfectly reasonable good-faith change, but since Lytro is a single-product business that's been in the news recently, I fear that if we don't have a neutral description of the technology in the Lytro article, we'll end up with the original situation where Lytro is presented as the only camera that has these features. I've restored the deleted section pending wider discussion. - Pointillist (talk) 11:09, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

There would be also other ways of making it clear that there are other makers of plenoptic cameras, for example indicating the differences to the competition visibly in the first paragraphs (technology, applications, and so on.) Maybe we could agree to reconsider the Technology section if and when these differences are elaborated there better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.44.239 (talk) 02:46, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Viewing experience
In the presentation I saw yesterday, Lytro heavily emphasized how they envisioned the technology being used not only for postprocessing but by the viewer, and demonstrated that they could easily post images to Facebook with a link to an interactive viewer. I can't find any references to this in the media but I think it's an exciting part of the message and would like to incorporate it if sources could be found. Dcoetzee 19:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

A bit promotional
The Light field article is good, but this one is a bit promotional. "Light field photography (also known as plenoptic photography) captures all the available light in a scene going in every direction." is just wrong. The cited source makes a much narrower statement, and these cameras don't actually do that. That needs to be reworded. --John Nagle (talk) 06:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Newsrelease template
I added the newsrelease template because most of the sources are articles that take their information strictly from Lytro news releases and are not objective. TimL &bull; talk 07:05, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Rewrite
The technology and lead para may need to be rewritten. The technology section might not adequately provide an insight into the uniqueness and working of the product. Harsh (talk)  14:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

I think this article needs an updated info set. The majority of citations are quite old. As this company has a product that is available to the mainstream consumer in a current form I would think that current information would be added. IE: Imagine reading a Wiki article about Intel, Google, Apple that used information and citations from 5-7 years ago. I think you all get the point. Gmlew77t (talk) 01:50, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

HTC One Max (and M8) - Depth-map camera
Anyone evaluating this should also look at smartphones - HTC One Max and HTC One (M8) - that have a second camera ('Duo-camera'), to produce a Depth map. This permits post-processing effects - refocus, parallax 3D. Not sure how or if this should be added to the article ? --195.137.93.171 (talk) 22:05, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

True 2D resolution of Lytro cameras
I don't want to add information from here because it's my article so it would not be right, but if you feel that the results of my research are worth pointing out in this article please do! http://www.everyothershot.com/lytro-illum/ 86.185.136.70 (talk) 08:44, 16 August 2015 (UTC)