Hands-On with Swankolab, a Chemical Darkroom for the iPhone

swankolab

Put ten photographers in a room and ask them what got them hooked on photography. Nine will say it was the moment that they saw the patches of darkness appear on their first print as it sloshed in the developer bath. I’m in that nine, and the traditional darkroom has some powerful emotional magic.

How can digital photogs get in on this romance? With, amazingly, a new iPhone app called Swankolab, which lets you mix up chemicals and flick on the red light, all from the comfort of your own palm. I took it for a spin, and ended up spending a lot more time on this review than I had planned.

First, you pick a photo from your iPhone’s library and go to work. Instead of picking a developer, a stop bath and a fixer, you choose chemicals with names like Vinny Vignette (”darkens the edges”) or Flamoz Fixer (”super warm saturation”). You can only add so many chemicals before the bath is full.

Then hit the switch, the lights dim and the timer ticks. Your image fades up from the bottom of a rippling tank and then it is hung up in a string to dry. It’s surprisingly addictive (just like the real thing), only you won’t lose your lungs to the hobby.

The company behind the app is Synthetic Corp, which is also responsible for Hipstamatic, the iPhone app that mimics trashy old Soviet-era cameras. If you have used that, you’ll know the level of polish to expect, from the constantly bubbling soundtrack of chemicals and a wheezing fan, to the beautifully-lit wooden cabinet in which your photos hang. You can even visit Uncle Stu’s rather seedy Photo Emporium, a darkroom supply catalog (trust us, you wouldn’t want Uncle Stu to look after your kids). This is an in-app store where you can buy new chemicals, or subscribe to the catalog for $2 for a lifetime’s supply of new updates. Buying will give you nine new chemicals plus anything that is added with future app updates.

And there’s more. A leather-bound book of formulas has a list of pre-made recipes, and you can add to the list any of your favorite combos, along with a name and description. Once done, you can email photos or add them back to your film-roll. This is where I have my single suggestion for improvement. In the app, your photos are presented with a cute Polaroid-style white border. This disappears on export. It would be great to have a choice.

If you have an iPhone, enjoy photography and have a heart rattling around inside that cold, dry ribcage of yours, you should buy this app. Not only is it fun, but the results are quirkily excellent. $2.

Swankolab [iTunes]

Swankolab [Synthetic Corp]

See Also:


IPhone OS 4.0 Hints at Front-Facing Camera

wwwtuaw

Barely a day after Apple introduced iPhone OS 4 and made a beta available to developers, details have begun to trickle out about the new multi-tasking operating system. One enterprising reader of The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) ran system monitoring tool iStat on an iPhone running v4 and came up with the screenshot above.

Most of it looks fairly unassuming, but iChat is new, and the folks at TUAW make a huge leap form here, assuming that iChat equals front-facing camera “It seems unlikely that Apple would merely introduce an instant messaging app without support for video conferencing,” they write.

I remain unconvinced. First, why run a chat daemon at all if there is no camera present. Second, iChat is not just a video-conferencing app. And third, who wants it anyway? The iPad could do with a webcam for making Skype calls (although an actual rear-facing camera on the iPad seems plain stupid on such a big device), but the iPhone? Who really wants to video-conference on a tiny screen? It would be a novelty at best.

I may be wrong, but I have a feeling that a front-facing camera is the FM-radio of its day. Every iPod competitor put one in, and everyone thought Apple would eventually include one in the iPod. It took almost ten years to arrive (and you can bet that nobody uses the radio in the Nano). IChat? Sure. iSight? Nah.

iChatAgent process shows up in iPhone OS 4.0 — video conferencing coming? [TUAW]

See Also:


Headfirst Insanity: 6 Gnarly Helmetcam Videos

<< previous image | next image >>







Surfing 30-foot waves, skiing off cliffs, and biking down the stairs in a Rio slum are the exact kind of heart-pumping insanity that most of us have far too much sense to attempt.

That doesn’t mean you can’t get a glimpse of what it’s like, though.

We found a few crazed adrenaline junkies who’d recorded their exploits using helmet-mounted cameras that let you see their exploits from their point of view.

You won’t get the adrenaline rush, but you will get to see what it looks like — in HD.

These videos were shot using GoPro cameras. Lightweight cameras like these will run you around 300 bucks, but the video footage you’ll get is priceless!

Assuming you survive, that is.

Helmetcam: Surfing a Tube at Sunset

This sequence is shot from surfer Gabriel Villaran’s point of view, using an HD Helmet Hero Cam from GoPro, somewhere in Mexico.

Normally this camera shoots in widescreen, but he used a 4:3 aspect ratio so the top of the wave didn’t get cut off.

960p mode, 1280 x 960, 4:3, 170-degree angle of view, 30fps.


Flickr User Gives Away Free Pinhole Cameras

4450318488_af90acf612_o

Maker and Flickrer Francesco Capponi wants to give you a camera. The catch is that you must make it yourself. The pinhole camera, seen above, comes in the form of a JPEG image which you can download, cut out and keep.

The camera, called the Dippold Pinhole Camera, is a template for A4 or US letter sized paper. You print it, stick it to a sheet of cardboard and follow the assembly instructions. The black-printed template forms the inside and cuts down on reflected light, and whatever card you use shows up on the outside (we recommend a Captain Crunch cereal box). You’ll need to bring some of your own objects to the project, though. First, a rubber-band to keep it all together and second, two rolls of film.

One of these should be an empty canister, one full. You open up the empty one, thread the film-leader onto the reel and use it as a take-up spool. This has the advantage of keeping both exposed and unexposed film in a safe, light-tight container.

And of course, you’ll need to develop and print the film, but if you are in Europe or any other Easter-celebrating country, you have fully four days of holiday, including today, to try it out. A great weekend project.

dippold pinhole camera 1.0 [Flickr via Make]

See Also:


Study: Cheap Cameras Break More than Expensive Ones, and Panasonic Breaks Least

screen-shot-2010-03-31-at-35631-pm

Did you know that more expensive gadget break less often? If you answered “Duh, of course,” then congratulations: You have a brain and can likely think and keep you mouth open at the same time. Nevertheless, a new study showing the reliability figures in the digital camera market has some interesting (and non-obvious) results.

First, the study was conducted over three years by SquareTrade, a company which sells warranties. While this could add a bias, it also means the company has plenty of its own accurate data to draw on. With that in mind, read on.

The study looked at failure rates of cameras based on both price and age. Around 7% of cameras will fail in the first two years (another 5% break due to accidents), rising to nearly 10% after three years. That doesn’t sound too bad, unless you’re in that unlucky minority.

If you spend a little more money, your camera is likely to last longer, because it is better built, although quality varies widely with brand (see below). So while the overall (2-year) malfunction rate of cameras is 11%, fully 7.4% of failures come from cameras under $150. Spend over $500 and the chance the camera will stop working falls to just 4%.

This is hardly panic material, though, and those extended warranties are probably still a lot more trouble than they’re worth (if they didn’t make money, nobody would sell them).
screen-shot-2010-03-31-at-35543-pm

But one final tidbit of information is the breaking down of reliability by brand. This counts only for compacts: despite a sample-size of 60,000 cameras, SquareTrade hasn’t sold enough warranties to DSLR owners to get meaningful results. For cameras under $300, Panasonic wins, with a malfunction rate of 5.3% compared the Casio, coming in last at 13%. Between $300 and $500, Panasonic wins again, with just 1.9%. The big surprise? Canon loses, with 6.2% of its premium compacts failing in the first two years, making them three times more likely to break than those from Panasonic.

Should you base your buying decisions on these figures? Probably not. After all, with the exception of cheap Casio cams (and Polaroids, but who buys those anyway?) these figures are all pretty low. The upside? Tech actually seems pretty reliable these days.


iPad Camera Connector Clones Five-Year-Old iPod Version

pod-pad-camera-kit

Apple has finally made its $29 iPad camera connection kit available fro pre-order. The kit consists of two little plastic dongles which hook into the iPad’s dock port. On has an SD card reader on the other end, the other has a plain old USB port for plugging the camera in direct.

If you order it now, you won’t get it until the end of April. You may also be a little upset by the price. But some of you may remember another, very similar little dongle Apple made way back in 2005: The iPod Camera Connector. This device, almost identical to the new USB version, cost $29 on its own. Adjusted for inflation, that comes to $31.59, which makes it over double the price (you get two widgets in the new kit).

Will the old dongle work with the new iPad? We won’t know until somebody who still has an old one lying around tries it out, but we’d guess that this is simply the same product relaunched. Finally, a word of advice: If you shoot RAW photographs, you may not want to order this kit just yet. The iPad supports the RAW format, but until Apple publishes a list of supported RAW cameras, you’d better just wait.

iPad Camera Connection Kit [Apple]


Boda V3: The Handiest Camera Bag Ever?

boda v3

The Boda V3 is a lens-bag that costs almost $200. Despite this, Boda will probably sell as many as it can make. All you photographers out there know that finding the perfect bag is impossible, but still we try. Boda may have worked out why: “Most camera bags are designed for storage,” says the product page, so instead, “BODA lens bags are designed for activity.”

To this end, the shoulder or waist-mounted V3 doesn’t even have a space for your camera, because of course you are using it. Instead, you load it up with everything else. Lenses go inside the main space (three of them), and are separated with familiar soft dividers. The lid flips all the way open for easy access. Around the edges of the bag are almost countless pockets and pouches: a big one for your flash, smaller ones for notepads, a cellphone, batteries and a special pocket for a memory cards. The idea is that you can work quickly from the bag when shooting, and you could even stick an extra lens in the side-mounted water-bottle pocket.

Is it worth $195? I guess that depends. The inventor, Seattle-based Jim Garner, is a wedding photographer, and that seems like a perfect use-case (his bag is in the picture above, along with all the kit he manages to squeeze in). There is also a smaller version, the V3 Junior, but it is only $20 less. I’m seriously considering buying this, but then I have a bag problem. Perhaps I’ll try to make my own.

Boda V3 [Go Boda]

See Also:


Dung Beetles Inspire Video Enhancements for Camera Phones

dung-beetle

Video cameras on your cellphone could soon be good enough to record a jazz concert, a nighttime street scene, or a candlelit dinner. A Swedish start-up has created an algorithm, inspired by dung beetles, that can be integrated into camera modules to offer high-quality video in extremely low light situations.

“We are talking about shooting video in situations that seem almost pitch black,” Benjamin Page, business development manager for Nocturnal Vision told Wired.com. “We can offer an unbelievable amount of noise reduction and contrast enhancement at the same time.” Nocturnal Vision presented its technology at the ISE 2010 imaging conference in London Thursday.

Toyota, which financed a significant portion of the research and development, has secured exclusive rights to use the technology in night-vision systems for cars.

Nocturnal Vision says it is now working with mobile phone companies such as Sony Ericsson to test its technology and find a way to integrate it into phones.

As more consumers use the cameras on their cellphones for video and photographs, companies are looking for ways to improve the quality of the camera modules. Earlier this week, Palo Alto startup InVisage Technologies said it has developed a new technology using a nanomaterial called quantum dots that would offer four times the light-gathering performance of current silicon-based sensors.

Nocturnal Vision says its software can be complementary to hardware-based improvements.

The company’s algorithm is based on research by a Lund University zoologist Eric Warrant on dung beetles, bees and other nocturnal bugs. Dung beetles are remarkable because of their ability to see enough detail in the night to find food and escape predators.

Their night-vision capability is the result of their ability to “sum the visual signal locally in space and time,” says Henrik Malm, one of the creators of the algorithm in his research paper. It’s known as adaptive spatio-temporal smoothing. That means the brain analyzes what’s going on across each frame of an image and what’s going on from one frame to another. (See Malm’s research paper on noise reduction and image enhancement in low light video.)

In most digital cameras today, the short, one-time exposure (usually a fraction of a second) and imaging sensors that have uniform sensitivity across their area combine to produce pictures that have underexposed dark areas. Amplifying the dark areas uniformly means the low signal-to-noise ratio becomes pronounced, writes Malm. Instead, adaptive spatio-temporal intensity smoothing can even out the noise, while reducing motion blur.

To do this, Nocturnal Vision’s algorithm pools information from about seven frames before and after a shot to brighten, reduce noise and sharpen the video stream, says Page. The technology can work in real time as scenes are shot, or can be applied to video in post-processing. However, because it requires multiple frames, it won’t work with single-exposure still images.

For instance, a video on the company’s website shows a clip of a man walking in the night. The algorithm first enhances the darker pixels in the frame more than the lighter ones to reveal additional details. But that also introduces a noise into the frame. The algorithm then pools brightness information from adjacent frames to correct for the noise.

The challenge for Nocturnal Vision is that the algorithm sucks up processing power. Most smartphones today, including those featuring the 1-GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon processor, don’t have enough muscle to run the software.

“Currently, we are running it on test devices via GPU computation power,” says Page. “For a standard video with resolution of 640 x 480 it requires approximately 14 billion calculations per frame.”

Nocturnal Vision’s technology works best on uncompressed images. Since most camera phones compress photos as soon as they are taken, that means Nocturnal Vision’s technology would need to be integrated into a phone’s firmware — or directly into a new line of chips. The company says it is looking for chip makers to do just this.

Page says Nocturnal Vision hopes to see its software in the hands of consumers within the next two years. “If we can work with the chip makers, we could be in millions of smartphones,” he says.

And your next nighttime videos might not be quite so dark.

See Also:

Photo: (Chris_Moody/Flickr)


Cheap Pocket Video Camera Shoots for Hours

ucorder-wearable-camcorder-highrez

I’m oddly drawn to devices like the uCorder, wearable video-cameras which measure their shooting time in chunks of a day rather than minutes. At first it seems vain and boring, or even a little creepy, to shoot your own point-of-view for hours at a time, but I’d bet that once you got your hands on one, all kinds of great projects would suggest themselves.

The uCorder comes in two flavors: 1GB and a 2GB, for $80 or $100, both of which shoot 640 x 480 VGA video. As both come with an SD-card slot, through which can be added an extra 8GB, we see little point in buying the $100 uCorder (although it does double as a webcam). Fully loaded, you can get seven hours of footage from a small, light package that will clip into a front pocket, hang around your neck or mount onto a helmet.

The movies are in AVI format, and you import them by plugging the camera into a USB port and dragging the files across. The camera also charges via USB. The most obvious use is sports, or at least non-contact sports. Here in Barcelona last weekend we held a Europe-wide bike polo tournament (yes, it was awesome, and we won). A couple of these cameras on players in the final would mix nicely with all the crowd-shot video.

One rather disturbing example from the uCorder site is a crotch-level bowling-cam: the camera is hanging from the players belt to film the pins tumbling. You could also just set the thing running after you leave the house and be sure you’ll capture something interesting enough to cut out and keep. And because it is a standalone device, you don’t have to worry about killing your cellphone’s battery. Creepy? Maybe. Fun? Hell yes.

uCorder Cameras [uCorder. Thanks, Mike!]


Impossible Project’s Polaroid film gets tested, looking pretty old-timey

The Impossible Project‘s new Polaroid-licensed film is going on sale in the UK this week, and the folks over at 1854 just got a nice little press packet in the mail which included some of the surely sought after film. The black and white only (color’s been promised for a later date) film, coupled with a Polaroid camera should obviously lead to some seriously ancient looking snapshots and… surprise, surprise — it does! Now, there are only a very few test shots (taken with a Polaroid SX-70) included for review here, so it’s hard to gauge overall quality of the output, but we have to say the snaps we’re seeing look so antiquey that it’s actually hard to tell what we’re even looking at in the photo — is it the ghost of John Wayne? Is that Charlotte Bronte or Lady Gaga hanging tough in the foreground? Still, we have to say we’re intrigued with the whole idea of producing photos this sepia-toned and grainy, especially at our next in-house competitive rave off. Hit the source link for more test shots.

Impossible Project’s Polaroid film gets tested, looking pretty old-timey originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:49:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  source1854  | Email this | Comments