Kodak's New Sensor May Eliminate Flash

Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:58PM EDT

See Comments (203)

Imagine...no red eye. Period. Or no need for a flash on a digital camera.

Now that digital camera makers have come up with all kinds of ways to eliminate red eye and improve flash technology while stabilizing images, Kodak says it is developing digital technology that will nearly eliminate the need for a flash (and the oft-accompanying red eye) and improve performance in low-light conditions.

Here's how it would work: The new technology would increase light sensitivity of existing image sensors by two to four times. That means a camera's shutter speed could increase, which would reduce camera shake and blurring problems. If it works, it also would allow photographers to shoot in low light without producing grainy, speckled photos.

The proof is in the pixels. In most digital cameras, each sensor pixel detects either the color red, green, or blue and places them into a pattern named for Bryce Bayer, the Kodak engineer who developed it. With the new high-sensitivity technology, half of the pixels will be panchromatic, or clear, so they will capture only the brightness, not color. That means a 12-megapixel camera would have 6 million panchromatic pixels, 3 million green pixels, 1.5 million red pixels, and 1.5 million blue pixels. In comparison, today's 12-megapixel cameras have 6 million green pixels, 3 million red, and 3 million blue.

The announcement is Kodak's latest big play in an intense bid to rebuild into a digital photography company as its film business dwindles. The company's plan is to make use of its proprietary intellectual property, including this image sensor technology, to compete in the crowded digicam market. Kodak entered the printer business this year with models that are slightly higher priced than competitors' but use ink that retails for about half the cost of other cartridges.

Kodak will build its own cameras with the new technology, but it also plans to sell it to other manufacturers since it works with existing image sensors. The new tech will be available in early 2008, but Kodak has given no word on when the first cameras with it fully built in will be on the market.

On each page in my photo albums of the kids since they were little, there's at least one photo besmirched by red eyes, the scourge of the snap shooter. More and more cameras are including tools to remove red eye in camera, while even the most amateur among us have become pretty adept at removing the demonizing glare with tools on photo software, online photo ordering sites, and in-store kiosks. But built-in technology that eliminates the need to tinker before and post shooting would be a welcome feature in a digital camera.

Is this the kind of feature you've been waiting for in a digital camera?

LINKS: Kodak says camera sensor may eliminate flash [Reuters via Yahoo! News]
Kodak boosts digital camera sensitivity [Cnet News.com]

Editor's note: Thanks for the sharp eyes, readers. This technology would let the shutter speed be increased, not decreased. 

Top 5 Posts

Comments on Kodak's New Sensor May Eliminate Flash

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 7 Posted by rmendales on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:44PM EDT Report Abuse

    Multiplying sensitivity by 2 to 4 times won't eliminate the need for flash with digicams which give noise-free pictures only at the equivalent of about 100 ASA. It will be most useful for high end DSLRs, which have faster lenses and can already produce decent results at about ASA 1600. I'm not sure how much of a mass market that will provide for Kodak, although I would be interested in buying a DSLR able to shoot noise-free at ASA 6400.

  • 8 Posted by satchriani on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:06PM EDT Report Abuse

    I'll believe it when I see it. Kodak digital cameras leave a lot to be desired. They've been surpassed for years by Canon and Nikon (Sony included) in image quality.

  • 9 Posted by notescafe on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:41PM EDT Report Abuse

    As I am in the paparazzi business, I am always put into situations with low light and cannot use a flight. Thanks to this camera... I can get great shots!

  • 10 Posted by rick_from_mich on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:40PM EDT Report Abuse

    I'm glad to see that Kodak is finally getting into the game seriously. However, regardless of how much they innovat, i won't buy a Kodak until they improve the quality of their cameras. When I bought my first Kodak digital camera, it barely operated. The folks at Kodak treated me like crap. Their loss. Since that time I have purchased thousands of dollars worth of digital camera equipment for my business and guess who didn't get a single sale . . . . I'd rather buy my camera equipment from a domestic manufacturer. And I might consider buying another Kodak if the camera came with a VERY long warantee. Until then, I'll spend my money elsewhere.

  • 11 Posted by richbruiser on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:40PM EDT Report Abuse

    There's a typo...."In comparison, today's 12-megapixel cameras have 6 million green pixels, 3 million red, and 3 million." I believe the word "blue" should be the last word of this paragraph.

  • 12 Posted by derelictmind777 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:41PM EDT Report Abuse

    This article is so badly written, especially the lead, that it is nearly useless. Enjoy the new technology everyone... just don't give these Yahoo! writers a pass for their oft repeated hackery.

  • 13 Posted by hazyshade23 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:17PM EDT Report Abuse

    love the idea.. i wish they would do this with film too

  • 14 Posted by rikkilin on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:42PM EDT Report Abuse

    Okay I can see the attraction, but what brought me to digital originally is the clarity of color and depth pared with the ease of use. I won't buy anything now that I'm going to lose the picture quality for a little more ease of use. Plus I have a great camera that with port only cost about 350. Sell me on the benefits and it better be more then just red eye.

  • 15 Posted by jeremyjadams on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:33PM EDT Report Abuse

    Very telling how Kodak says nothing about noise. The title was totally false. An extra 2 stops will hardly negate the need for a flash.

  • 16 Posted by techbot4910 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:59PM EDT Report Abuse

    you know this is just the type of thing i need for my photo hobbies

  • 17 Posted by mr_mcfuzz on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:28PM EDT Report Abuse

    I can't wait, this is a true breakthrough!

  • 18 Posted by kms_art on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:52PM EDT Report Abuse

    Will this also take care of the weird white eye flash most dogs get with a digital camera flash?

  • 22 Posted by iamplinkr on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:22PM EDT Report Abuse

    This technology sounds great. Anyone know of any site in which to go to see an actual side by side conparison of the "old" flash technology compared to the new no-flash technology? Like the old saying goes - seeing is beliving...... :)

  • 24 Posted by crmprojekt on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:31PM EDT Report Abuse

    This would be Great to see this technology on Canon's Professional line of digital SLR's. Kodak needs partner up with Canon and do some co-branding with this new technology...this is one of the only ways that Kodak can survive in the photography world since film is almost dead.

Post a Comment


My Tech

Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.

Also on Yahoo! Tech

Computers Home Office Wi-Fi & Networking Phones & PDAs Cameras & Camcorders TV & Home Theater Portable Audio
 

Question and Answer content at Yahoo! Tech is written by Yahoo! users at Yahoo! Answers. Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. For more information, read the Full Disclaimer.

Opinions expressed by the Advisors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo! receives no compensation from any manufacturer or distributor nor does it compensate any Advisor for the coverage of any product or service in any Advisor's content.