Sigma/Foveon Questions
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: SI Facescape
Next: FF camera with mirrorless design
From: Ray Fischer on 25 Apr 2010 15:08 David J Taylor <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message >[] >> A piel is a picture element. You cannot split up the color >> componenets of a pixel in some arbitrary way and then claim that a >> single pixel is really three, four, or a thousand pixels. > >What makes you think I am? A Bayer camera described as, for example, >12MP, typically has 3MP of red, 3MP of blue, and 6MP of green sensitive >elements, Wrong. Not "elements". Pixels. Nothing in the definition of "pixel" implies any particular amount of color/luminence. Even though none of the pixels contains full color information, they're still pixels. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: nospam on 25 Apr 2010 15:08 In article <hr22r7$ted$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, David J Taylor <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > It is spatial. Typically there are n red sensing pixels, but 4n RGB > output pixels. n luminance samples and n pixels output, exactly the same number. the chroma is sampled at a lower rate.
From: Ray Fischer on 25 Apr 2010 15:08 David J Taylor <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >>> .. where you find the basic spatial interpolation described, along with >>> enhancements. >> >> interpolation yes, spatial no. there are n pixels going in, n pixels >> coming out. > >It is spatial. Typically there are n red sensing pixels, but 4n RGB >output pixels. Are you nuts? -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Ray Fischer on 25 Apr 2010 15:11 Kennedy McEwen <rkm(a)kennedym.demon.co.uk> wrote: >In article <230420102323351152%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>, nospam ><nospam(a)nospam.invalid> writes >>In article <hqu0s2$4fu$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, David J Taylor >><david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >> >>> So how is the red and green content at the blue pixel location created, if >>> not by spatial interpolation? >> >>it looks to its neighbors to calculate the missing components. it's not >>upsizing anything. > >Time for you to look up the definition of "interpolation". It is a >technique which used to upsize, but it is not the only one and neither >is upsizing the only application of the technique. Time for YOU to look up the definition of "pixel". >Furthermore, a 640x480 sensor with a Bayer CFA is four interleaved >arrays of 320x240 red, green, blue and green pixels. The output is three >overlayed arrays of red green and blue pixels. Going from 320x240 to >640x480 *IS* upsizing! Can't you do math? If you dive 640x480 by four, and then multiple it by four, then you still get 640x480 and no upsizing has occurred. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Ray Fischer on 25 Apr 2010 16:20
Kennedy McEwen <rkm(a)kennedym.demon.co.uk> wrote: >In article <230420102323351152%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>, nospam ><nospam(a)nospam.invalid> writes >>In article <hqu0s2$4fu$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, David J Taylor >><david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >> >>> So how is the red and green content at the blue pixel location created, if >>> not by spatial interpolation? >> >>it looks to its neighbors to calculate the missing components. it's not >>upsizing anything. > >Time for you to look up the definition of "interpolation". It is a >technique which used to upsize, but it is not the only one and neither >is upsizing the only application of the technique. Time for YOU to look up the definition of "pixel". >Furthermore, a 640x480 sensor with a Bayer CFA is four interleaved >arrays of 320x240 red, green, blue and green pixels. The output is three >overlayed arrays of red green and blue pixels. Going from 320x240 to >640x480 *IS* upsizing! Can't you do math? If you divide 640x480 by four, and then multiply it by four, then you still get 640x480 and no upsizing has occurred. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net |