W
hen a set of  online teasers for a new camera called the 
Lytro appeared earlier this  year, you could have been forgiven for seeing the invention as just  another gimmick. The camera’s attention-grabbing feature is a kind of  after-the-fact 
autofocus: with a click, any blurry portion in a picture  can be snapped into sharpness—another step in the march of idiot-proof  photography.
In fact, such image correction is merely a side effect of what is  genuinely different about the technology. The 
Lytro, scheduled to reach  buyers early next year, creates a wholly new kind of visual object, one  that both exemplifies and exploits the way images are consumed in the  digital era.  
The underlying technique is called “light-field photography.” A  traditional camera, of course, captures light reflected off its subject  through a lens and onto a flat surface. Proper focus is important to  ensure that the image you get is the precise slice of visual reality you  want. But “computational photography,” pioneered by Marc 
Levoy of  Stanford University and others, takes a different approach, essentially  using hundreds of cameras to capture all the visual information in a  scene and processing the results into a many-layered digital object. One  of 
Levoy’s former students, 
Ren Ng, added the twist that resulted in  the 
Lytro: instead of using multiple cameras, he integrated hundreds of  micro lenses into a single device.
The upshot is a photograph that’s less a slice of visual  information than a cube, from which you can choose whichever layer would  make the most pleasing two-dimensional image for printing and framing.  But you can also leave the picture as it is—a three-dimensional capture  suitable for digital display or distribution—and let others do the  fiddling. Rather than a definitive, static image, a light-field visual  object is intrinsically interactive.
In the pictorial examples the 
Lytro company has released online,  this flexibility comes across as a fun novelty: you can focus on the  Empire State Building in the distance, or the raindrop-splattered window  in the foreground. But the implications are more profound. “It’s fair  to say that this technology is a game changer,” says Richard 
Koci  Hernandez, a photographer and assistant professor of new media at the  University of California at Berkeley. The company gave Hernandez a 
Lytro  prototype to beta test, and he argues that it represents as important a  breakthrough as auto-focus itself, or even the great shift to digital  photography.
Imagine, he suggests, a photojournalist covering a presidential  speech whose audience includes a clutch of protesters. Using a  traditional camera, he says, “I could easily set my controls so that  what’s in focus is just the president, with the background blurred. Or I  could do the opposite, and focus on the protesters.” A 
Lytro capture,  by contrast, will include both focal points, and many others. Distribute  that image, he continues, and “the viewer can choose—I don’t want to  sound professorial—but can choose the truth.”
Hernandez admits to mixed feelings about this, and suspects many  photographers will find it threatening. “In some sense, you’re losing  that control,” he says. On the other hand, he notes, the technology  enables the creation of a new kind of image, whose full meaning actually  requires viewer interaction. “I’
ve already been thinking about the  crazy things you could do with this.” 
That’s what 
Lytro’s founder, 
Ng, wants to hear. As he puts it, “You  inherently want to click on a 
Lytro image and discover things in it.  Crafting that moment of discovery becomes a new kind of picture-taking.”  He adds that the first 
Lytro models—priced between $399 and $499—will  be accessible to mainstream consumers and pros alike.
Given that most photographic images these days are viewed onscreen  and never printed (let alone framed), our expectations about what a  photograph can be were bound to come into question. The 
Lytro camera is  about to offer us one compelling answer.
Rob Walker is a contributing writer to The New York Times Magazine and Design Observer.