http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...ALL&S1=08676045&OS=PN/08676045&RS=PN/08676045
Amazon patented taking pictures a certain way with a white background. Seriously?? Now, what's to stop patent trolls from patenting a larger number of "types" of photography, with the aim of later suing anyone using images of their products for copyright infringement? So, flash from the front, flash from the back, white surface, and camera 9 feet away = patent violation.
First - Here are the three independent claims of the patent you cited -
1. A studio arrangement, comprising: a background comprising a white cyclorama; a front light source positioned in a longitudinal axis intersecting the background, the longitudinal axis further being substantially perpendicular to a surface of the white cyclorama; an image capture position located between the background and the front light source in the longitudinal axis, the image capture position comprising at least one image capture device equipped with an eighty-five millimeter lens, the at least one image capture device further configured with an ISO setting of about three hundred twenty and an f-stop value of about 5.6; an elevated platform positioned between the image capture position and the background in the longitudinal axis, the front light source being directed toward a subject on the elevated platform; a first rear light source aimed at the background and positioned between the elevated platform and the background in the longitudinal axis, the first rear light source positioned below a top surface of the elevated platform and oriented at an upward angle relative to a floor level; a second rear light source aimed at the background and positioned between the elevated platform and the background in the longitudinal axis, the second rear light source positioned above the top surface of the elevated platform and oriented at a downward angle relative to the floor level; a third rear light source aimed at the background and positioned in a lateral axis intersecting the elevated platform and being substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, the third rear light source further positioned adjacent to a side of the elevated platform; and a fourth rear light source aimed at the background and positioned in the lateral axis adjacent to an opposing side of the elevated platform relative to the third rear light source; wherein a top surface of the elevated platform reflects light emanating from the background such that the elevated platform appears white and a rear edge of the elevated platform is substantially imperceptible to the image capture device; and the first rear light source, the second rear light source, the third rear light source, and the fourth rear light source comprise a combined intensity greater than the front light source according to about a 10:3 ratio.
2. A studio arrangement, comprising: a background comprising a cyclorama; a front light source positioned in a longitudinal axis intersecting the background, the longitudinal axis further being substantially perpendicular to a surface of the background; an image capture position located between the background and the front light source in the longitudinal axis; an elevated platform positioned at a first distance from the elevated platform and between the image capture position and the background along the longitudinal axis, the front light source being directed toward the elevated platform; a first at least one rear light source positioned between the elevated platform and the background, the at least one rear light source directed towards the background; a second at least one rear light source positioned in a lateral axis intersecting the elevated platform and being substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal axis; at least one light shield positioned between the second at least one rear light source and the elevated platform, the at least one light shield configured to shield the elevated platform from light emitted directly from the second at least one rear light source from lighting an upper surface of the elevated platform; and wherein a top surface of the elevated platform reflects light emanating from the background such that the elevated platform appears a substantially similar color as the background and a rear edge of the elevated platform is substantially imperceptible to an image capture device positioned at the image capture position.
25. A method, comprising: positioning a subject on an elevated platform in a studio arrangement, the studio arrangement comprising a plurality of rear light sources positioned behind the elevated platform and aimed at a background behind the elevated platform, the background comprising a cyclorama; activating the plurality of rear light sources, the plurality of rear light sources comprising a plurality of light sources being substantially evenly distributed over the background; activating a front light source aimed at the subject, wherein an image capture position is positioned between the front light source and the elevated platform; initiating image capture in an image capture device positioned at the image capture position; shielding the subject from light directly emanating from the plurality of rear light sources onto the subject; and wherein a top surface of the elevated platform reflects light emanating from the background such that the elevated platform appears a substantially similar color as the background and a rear edge of the elevated platform is substantially imperceptible to the image capture device.
Second - There is a hell of a lot of stuff in those claims. They did not patent a basic studio arrangement or method. They patented things with ~20 very specific elements in it. How they plan to enforce either of those claims is a mystery to me. Doesn't seem like it would be possible to determine who is infringing from the photos that are taken. Which means that unless amazon goes into every photo studio they will probably have a tough time making a reasonable determination as to who is infringing their claims.
Third - to answer your question - the thing that is preventing "trolls" from patenting basic methods of taking photos is most likely the existence of prior art. A quick search of the U.S. patent database reveals patents with the word "photography" in them were issued at least as early as 1890. And some of those patents were for "basic" things like mirrors, flashes, etc. Only that at the time those patents were granted, the technology they described was not basic at all. Tell me - was it wrong to patent that stuff back then?
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US935760.pdf
Facebook
Twitter