Has Foveon future?

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

  1. George Preddy, Nov 20, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. ThomasH

    Guest Guest

    Can you not read?

    Did I reference Bayer cameras anywhere in that post?

    No! I linked to an image which shows what happens when you don't have an
    anti alias filter. It will happen wether you have a fovean or bayer sensor
    without anti-alias filter.

    You don't even seem to know why the pictures your camera produces appear
    sharp, but are actually optically quite inaccurate representations of the
    real world.


    Please George, please please I beg of you, tell me that you at least
    understand that it is the lack of an AA filter which gives Foveon images
    there sharp appearance. Do that much for me, then I will know that you
    aren't a lost cause.
     
    Guest, Nov 20, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. ThomasH

    JPS Guest

    In message <bpic7e$iod$>,
    I hate to be a messenger of gloom, but SteveGeorge will never admit
    anything. I watched him babble on and on with his hands over his ears
    for 6 years in another newsgroup. He didn't budge an inch in that time.
    I consider arguing with him no more than an excercise; he will never
    admit that he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's in his late
    forties, IIRC, and if he hasn't come to his senses yet, I doubt he ever
    will. The facts don't matter one bit in his world.
    --
     
    JPS, Nov 20, 2003
  4. ThomasH

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Not once.
    You're babbling nonsense again.
     
    Ray Fischer, Nov 22, 2003
  5. I sold it, which is good use for me.
    The lens is sharp, it is the EF 2.8/20-35 mm L.
    I focussed after estimating the distance because
    I didn't want her to pose, and at 1/13 sec there
    is definitely camera movement.

    Now imagine how much more movement there would
    be at the 400 ISO the Sickmachine is limited to.
     
    Michael Quack, Nov 28, 2003
  6. The latter.
    Worse. He took the Jpeg, which is by no means the maximum
    quality you can expect from the 10D. I included that as
    a mere preview for people without RAW converting software.

    Convert the RAW to 16 bit/channel tiff, run levels, convert
    to LAB mode, select lightness channel, run unsharp mask,
    convert back to RGB mode, reduce to 8 bit/channel, save.

    *Now* you have what the 10D can do. Introducing Jpeg
    compression *is* _always_ lossy.
    That is why I included that.
    No wonder.
     
    Michael Quack, Nov 28, 2003
  7. Given the circumstances, the color is indeed breathtaking.
    There is a single 40 W lightbulb to the upper left behind a
    model ship, hitting some areas of the counter directly,
    but mainly bouncing off the red painted walls.
    Then there are two smaller 15 W lamps indirectly illuminating
    the shelf behind the bar and a green fluorescent Heineken
    neon sign to the low right.
    For an untrained eye the effects of artificial light
    and color temperature might indeed be confusing.
    You are not alone with this handicap.
    Good thing we have EXIF, isn't it? EXIF says
    "white balance sunny", surprise!
    Right. One large softbox overhead in front, a 5-in-1
    reflector silver side up right below the image border,
    a large backlight bank behind her and a splash light
    with a Lee Filter 181 "congo blue" on the background.
    Obviously your monitor is badly decalibrated.
    I gave her this selected image for exactly 100 bucks.
    Digital. I think this is pro caliber enough.
    Now wait a minute, the color is nice? A few
    seconds ago the skin tone was "blah"?
    Do you suffer from multiple personalities?
    No, that is your fault because you posted the small
    preview file which resembles an embedded small/fine
    jpeg from the RAW file. It is of course in no way
    representative for the full quality from the RAW file,
    but that wasn't what you wanted anybody to see anyway,
    was it?

    But what is it that forces you to make a clown out
    of yourself so badly? You must have known we would
    immediately see your futile attempt to cheat, or
    are you really stupid enough to think you can fool
    us so easy?
     
    Michael Quack, Nov 28, 2003
  8. Well, we add incompetence in prepress to the list, then.
    Any image, be it scanned or generated in a digital camera
    has to be sharpened in relation to the target use.

    And you are right, you don't need to sharpen, because
    your converter software does a very hefty job at that
    already.
     
    Michael Quack, Nov 28, 2003
  9. Like a cartoon is breaktaking.
     
    George Preddy, Nov 29, 2003
  10. What color does your screenreader tell you to imagine,
    blind man?
     
    Michael Quack, Nov 29, 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.