Very cool idea. Did you notice the patent pending? What's your thought on the patentability of this "idea".
I know when I first saw just the picture of the ball camera, my first thought was, "oh, if you throw the ball in the air you could take a 360 at the apex". I then read that is what they are doing.
So, does the patent satisfy the "non-obviousness" test? It certainly seems clever, but it also seems to me highly likely that this is neither novel nor non-obvious.
I think the non-obviousness part is calculating and taking the photos at the apex of the curve because I didn't immediately get that. Also, why 36 cameras (why not 20, or 72)? I think the bar for non-obviousness in patents is ridiculously low.
I know when I first saw just the picture of the ball camera, my first thought was, "oh, if you throw the ball in the air you could take a 360 at the apex". I then read that is what they are doing.
So, does the patent satisfy the "non-obviousness" test? It certainly seems clever, but it also seems to me highly likely that this is neither novel nor non-obvious.