Without full technical knowledge of how CCDs or CMOS sensors actually worked, I came up with that method a long time ago. I assumed someone cleverer than me had already patented it.
For some reason I thought the LG Viewty camphone used that (or similar) tech to get 120fps video.
The Sanyo Xacti camcorders achieve exactly the same effect (higher frame rates at lower resolutions) and I think Casio do too. Of course they don't have how it is done but surely it's the same thing?
Photographing money may be illegal, but in the US, I art directed a TV spot where a guy was throwing bundles of money into a campfire. The money bundles were mostly old phonebook pages, but the top few were color laser prints of $100 bill JPEGs downloaded from the US Mint!
Might be an exception for people in the film/video/theater business
"The technology has been patented by Isis Innovation, the University of Oxford's technology transfer office, and it's ready to be licensed by camera makers."
It's hardly a surprise any more that public/charity funding should be used, the "technology transfer" privateers skim off the cream, and it's published in a journal with a note saying "by the way, we own this - thanks for reading" or a message to that effect.
Meanwhile, as others have pointed out, it's quite likely that various cameras (notably the Casio EX-FC100) already do something very similar, as they offer increasing frame rates with decreasing resolution. Still, another patent for someone's war chest, and another nail in the coffin of the patent system in general.
You could use this system (and control the relative exposure times of individual pixel groups) to increase the dynamic range of the camera too (eg group 1 at 20ms, group 2 at 10ms, group 3 at 5 ms, etc) then combine the images into an HDR image.
This is old news from a high-speed video point of view.
High-frame-rate video cameras (1000s of fps) have been doing this for a loooooooong time. Admittedly, that's hardly 'off-the-shelf' kit, but I should think it's a pretty good bet for Prior Art as far as the patent is concerned.
Obviously, this comes with all the normal IANAPL disclaimers ;)
Oxford snaps high-speed movies with consumer cams
Hmmm
Can't believe this hasn't been thought of/patented before.
Then again they do say that the best ideas are often the simplest.
I thought of that a long time ago.
Without full technical knowledge of how CCDs or CMOS sensors actually worked, I came up with that method a long time ago. I assumed someone cleverer than me had already patented it.
For some reason I thought the LG Viewty camphone used that (or similar) tech to get 120fps video.
I guess not.
H.
obvious now someone's thought of it..
and quite good marketing covering it in El reg when it's apparently not been invested in yet.
Arxiv link
http://arxiv1.library.cornell.edu/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0910/0910.0789v1.pdf
No need to pay!
Having read that
They are not exactly using *only* a standard CMOS image sensor.
They are also using a micromirror device the same resolution, to control the per-pixel exposure.
Cost-wise, that's a bit like taking a standard sparkplug and building a Ferrari around it.
Already done
The Sanyo Xacti camcorders achieve exactly the same effect (higher frame rates at lower resolutions) and I think Casio do too. Of course they don't have how it is done but surely it's the same thing?
One mistake...
Photographing UK money is illegal. ^^
Correction
I think you'll find (according to certain police forces) that
Photographing [anything in the] UK is illegal.
Illegal?
Photographing money may be illegal, but in the US, I art directed a TV spot where a guy was throwing bundles of money into a campfire. The money bundles were mostly old phonebook pages, but the top few were color laser prints of $100 bill JPEGs downloaded from the US Mint!
Might be an exception for people in the film/video/theater business
Finally...
... an actual point to stuffing a 10 megapixel sensor behind a compact camera's titchy rubbish lens.
Paris, because she's been photographed and filmed.
Reminds me, whatever happened too ...
the design that used massively fewer pixels (i.e. cheaper) and moved them very slightly to give a hi-res image - c.f. how spiders see ?
How spiders see.
They experimented with that for a while, but it didn't have legs.
Mine's the one with the Basil Brush guide to humorous quips in the pocket.
Skim off the cream
"The technology has been patented by Isis Innovation, the University of Oxford's technology transfer office, and it's ready to be licensed by camera makers."
It's hardly a surprise any more that public/charity funding should be used, the "technology transfer" privateers skim off the cream, and it's published in a journal with a note saying "by the way, we own this - thanks for reading" or a message to that effect.
Meanwhile, as others have pointed out, it's quite likely that various cameras (notably the Casio EX-FC100) already do something very similar, as they offer increasing frame rates with decreasing resolution. Still, another patent for someone's war chest, and another nail in the coffin of the patent system in general.
Not exactly a new concept.
This is the same principal as interlaced television, which can be viewed as a "high resolution" still shot, or a "high frame rate" moving video.
In both cases, the camera simply rearranges the order in which pixels/lines are sequenced.
I believe some early 3d video games used this technique to compromise between an increased frame rate and resolution (resulting in some motion blur).
But there's no video
Just an empty space in the article
Another use...
You could use this system (and control the relative exposure times of individual pixel groups) to increase the dynamic range of the camera too (eg group 1 at 20ms, group 2 at 10ms, group 3 at 5 ms, etc) then combine the images into an HDR image.
Can't compress
It won't work saving to jpeg.
Old news day?
This is old news from a high-speed video point of view.
High-frame-rate video cameras (1000s of fps) have been doing this for a loooooooong time. Admittedly, that's hardly 'off-the-shelf' kit, but I should think it's a pretty good bet for Prior Art as far as the patent is concerned.
Obviously, this comes with all the normal IANAPL disclaimers ;)
"temporal pixel multiplexing"
Sounds like something Seven-of-Nine would invent to get Voyager out of trouble...