Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 20, 2004, 5:00 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

Hey, I'd like a digicam that I could say 'Focus on that target subject 20 metres forward and 3 to the right' and it would do it!

Seriously if manufacturers can't get them really right flying by wire, what hope is there adding another layer of technology and uncertainty?

One thing about film, - you used to take a cap off a box, light some magnesium and puff you got a picture! It helps to remember where photography started, not a re-chargeable battery or other paraphenalia anywhere in sight! VOX
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2004, 5:07 PM   #12
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

In 1998, I suffered a greater tuberosity fracture with a torn rotator cuff. So, I couldn't use my right arm for a while.

As a result, I tried several voice recognition packages, before settling on the one that worked best.

After about a month of training, I got so good with it, that I could work almost as fast as by typing.

However, this did take a lot of training (so that the voice recognition software learned my speech inflection, complex technical terms, etc.).

I suspect that advancements have been made in voice recognition software since then.

For Digital Camera use, it probably would not need to be quite so complex.

You'd have a fixed number of commands that you'd need the camera to respond to. So, you could record these commands individually with your own voice.

Take mobile phones as an example. Most mobile phones have voice dialing now. Some work fine (others don't).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2004, 5:32 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 158
Default

If I had a camera that responed to voice commands, I would much rather have that computing power be used for camera taking purposes (faster response, etc), not voice.

But a pretty good idea in theory.
I think it would work best on mini cameras for taking candid shots, because that way you wouldn't have to hold the camera to take the shot (and you wouldn't need a remote either).
blinblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2004, 6:02 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
cowboy43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 923
Default

I have a cell phone that is supposed to do that , Works terrible. A Camera? No way!!
cowboy43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2004, 6:10 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
koruvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 439
Default

Personally (there is that word again ;-) ) I like manual labour. Clicking a button isnt that difficult is it? ...

-
koruvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2004, 6:33 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

Hmm, one has to take the camera out of the bag/pocket, power the camera and aim it and next just a simple press of shutterbutton would be too much and is replaced by voice command? Voice control has a high gadget value. Some people will love the idea of camera on the bookshelf taking pictures at command. And next show it of at friends. Alas after certain amount of beheaded friends the fun pales.

For shots including the potographer him/herself there are already wireless remote controled cameras. I doubt that programmed voice control would really benefit over these existing techniques in rowdy places like a party.
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2004, 11:32 PM   #17
hst
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 182
Default Maybe not a bad idea in some settings

I used a car phone with voice commands and it worked great. It did the dialing and such for you. I used a cell phone that does the same and is exellent. In a studio setting it might be a great benefit. Instead of going back and forth to your subject you could get them setting right and then say the command such as "take" . With a swivel screen you could also compose the shot from in front of the camera and possibly zoom in and out. What about those times when you trying to get babies to get just the right pose and your flipping things in front of them. Also macro work, night photos, long telephoto shots where you don't want the camera to move at all. How about custom settings where one command could set the shutter, aperture etc without having to go through a bunch of menues. Maybe adding the ability to take a note with a picuture so you could replay the note when your back puting the image on your PC. Its good at times to think outside the standard box.
hst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2004, 12:35 AM   #18
Administrator
 
steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,535
Default

One of the self-timer options on the new Coolpix 3700 is called Sound Release. You can shout at the camera when it's in this mode and it will take a picture.

Reminds me of the Clapper -- Clap On, Clap Off :P

-Steve
steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2004, 1:11 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Alan T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 2,980
Default Re: i'm getting it now

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicountboo
How about if u programmed it to respond to your voice and just one command i.e "take"
Why?
Alan T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2004, 1:15 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Alan T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 2,980
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blinblue
...I think it would work best on mini cameras for taking candid shots...
..and so long as you didn't say "shoot" when taking pictures in the US with armed people around.
Alan T is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:33 PM.