Quote Originally Posted by samanime
Just those examples would be VERY difficult to fake, because you'd have to be able to take the picture from the same point while focusing on all those different things.

I guess you could also fake it by taking a small aperture photo so everything's sharp, then selectively blur; but how time consuming.

Quote Originally Posted by bulevardi
Can you still adjust your aperture? Or is aperture not important anymore.
For example, if you have a cheap lens that can go to f 3.5, can you shoot an image and later (after the picture is taken) choose what this picture will look like if it was shot at f1.8 ?
As I understand, the value of it would have to be that you can get all the information about a scene without using small apertures. Because if not, SLRs would already be able to do what they did.

I suppose if the camera really can somehow know how deep subjects are in a scene, it'd make the post-production much, much simpler. But what a massive raw file it would be!

If that's really the case, it doesn't sound like it would be practical for regular consumers. The people who take snap-shots don't (usually) want to take time to post-process; Not for a Facebook pic or whatever their use usually is.

In my head I'm imagining this thing as the digital, modern version of a large format camera. Like, it'd be big and heavy. The files would be too large to shoot like mad (like a usual photo shoot) so it'd be you'd carefully plan your shots, set up your tripod and your scene, then take a few dozen photos to fill up your memory card before you have to shop. Process them back at your computer and you'd get the best of the best quality of photos of the age, because they'd be in 3D.

But I figure I'm totally wrong.

If their selling point is that you could focus after taking pictures, I guess they really are making this thing for regular consumers.