Has Foveon future?

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by ThomasH, Oct 17, 2003.

  1. Bart van der Wolf, Nov 15, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. George Preddy, Nov 15, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. So ... you say that the Foveon chip has a 100% fill factor?
    No light falls in between the sensors?

    And ... you say that the the detection gives you 100% accuracy
    regarding the light sent out from the subject?

    The Foveon sensor based camera must perform magic indeed.
    It must be able to have knowledge about photons that
    never have been detected.

    Roland Karlsson, Nov 15, 2003
  4. Sorry George. We all have different preferences. I like the smooth,
    soft and very accurate look of the Bayer picture and I don't like the
    harsh look of the SD9. I think the aliasing artefacts make the poor
    girls look like they are not real. Look at the hair - it is not a
    nice sight.

    Roland Karlsson, Nov 15, 2003
  5. ThomasH

    Phil Guest


    After looking at his shots and yours, either you need a new monitor or
    new glasses.

    Phil, Nov 15, 2003
  6. Just for the record, it's not my image.

    All I did was convert the raw file so graciously donated by Michael Quack,
    but this time at the actual size and with a bit of sharpening, things that
    'George P' conveniently didn't do in his 'comparison'.

    I fear even a new monitor AND new glasses won't help 'George P', a lobotomy

    Bart van der Wolf, Nov 15, 2003
  7. ThomasH

    Phil Guest

    Seems so, Bart. Just returning here after a long absence, so I haven't
    been "Georged" until today :)

    Phil, Nov 16, 2003
  8. ThomasH

    JPS Guest

    In message <bp473f$qur$>,
    No one is agreeing with that nonsense. Only you are stupid enough,
    after all the facts are presented to you hundreds of times, to still
    insist that a partial-color spatial witness has no spatial resolution
    JPS, Nov 16, 2003
  9. That's fine, that's why they make softening filters (and give you a
    sharpness slider). They don't make optical resolution filters for 1.58MP
    Canon owners, unfortunately .
    George Preddy, Nov 17, 2003
  10. Mine either, all 3 are pro samples.
    George Preddy, Nov 17, 2003
  11. Does it have to sense every photon in the Universe to know luminance where
    it samples?
    George Preddy, Nov 17, 2003
  12. No - but to get "known colors" it has to detect all
    photons emitted from the source. It also have to
    be noise free.

    My point was that all devices are approximations.
    All detectors are "guessing", more or less.

    Roland Karlsson, Nov 18, 2003
  13. You don't get it do you? You cannot soften away aliasing artefacts.
    As a matter of fact, you cannot remove them at all.

    And, the soft apperence of the anti aliased pictures can be
    improved with the "sharpening slider" called USM.

    Roland Karlsson, Nov 18, 2003
  14. Which is an optically perfect solution, of course. Small amounts of USM
    are probably not going to destroy the image with artifact, 3-500%, which is
    the starting point for the 10D (the blurriest DSLR the 6MP-interpolated
    lot). We'll never really know where the finishing point is, because 10D
    owners refuse to post full size images.
    George Preddy, Nov 19, 2003
  15. ....

    And if you actually thought about this point in advance, you got it wrong.
    Over and over and over you repeat the same wrong idea. Have you completely
    ignored my several (very polite - could that be the problem?) explanations for

    Once again...A Bayer sensor does *NOT* use a 2x2 array to produce one
    pixel or 4 pixels. This is completely wrong. The 2x2 array is useful only in
    describing the layout of R, G, and B sensors. A Bayer sensor produces one
    pixel for every R, G, or B sensor. The pixel is the combination of the R, or G, or
    B information from the sensor, plus data from at least *EIGHT* surrounding
    sensors. Hence there is no "RGGB with one G thrown away" as you so
    incorrectly assert. So four nearby RGGB sensors should not and do not
    produce 4 identical pixels. Do you get it?

    Dan (Woj...) dmaster (at) lucent (dot) com

    "I believe in the kingdom come / Then all the colours will bleed into one
    Bleed into one / But yes, I'm still running
    You broke the bonds and you loosed the chains
    Carried the cross of my shame / Of my shame / You know I believe it"
    Dan Wojciechowski, Nov 19, 2003
  16. It is better than aliasing artefacts IMHO.
    3-500% USM has no meaning. You must say at what radius.
    Personally I have made stunning 10D pictures (originals
    downloaded from the net) with just radius 0.5 and 25%.
    There are tons of full size 10D pictures on the net.

    Roland Karlsson, Nov 19, 2003
  17. Addressed many times: no matter how much you shuffle and reshuffle the same
    optical data, optical limiting factor is the number of RGB sensors. Yes,
    some mathematical Bayer interpolation routines are better than others,
    because they get a little closer to that limit.
    George Preddy, Nov 19, 2003
  18. Rearranging all of the pixels in the image based on a computer algortihm
    that can't see, is better than an optical result?
    George Preddy, Nov 19, 2003
  19. ThomasH

    Guest Guest

    Guest, Nov 20, 2003
  20. ThomasH

    Guest Guest

    Guest, Nov 20, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.