A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

New sensor with unlimited dynamic range



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 24th 15, 08:20 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alfred Molon[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,205
Default New sensor with unlimited dynamic range

http://web.media.mit.edu/~hangzhao/modulo.html

When a pixel fills up, it is automatically emptied. The camera counts
the number of times a pixel is emptied. Pixels in the darker image areas
probably never completely fill up.

--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
  #2  
Old August 25th 15, 06:13 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,430
Default New sensor with unlimited dynamic range

In article , Alfred Molon wrote:

http://web.media.mit.edu/~hangzhao/modulo.html


When a pixel fills up, it is automatically emptied. The camera
counts the number of times a pixel is emptied. Pixels in the darker
image areas probably never completely fill up.


Pretty smart, but the example images didn't really sell the concept enough. With
"unlimited" dynamic range, you'd think nothing in the image could possibly be
overexposed, but some of the example images, while a lot better than the normal
photos, still looked like they were blown in areas.

Since this "unlimited" dynamic range only works for highlights, you also need to
expose for the darkest part of the scene.

Or, if this technology would find itself into normal Nikons and Canons, they
would automatically expose for the darkest part of the scene, while everything
else would be blown and then in-camera recovered.

Not sure what the coloring is used for in the example images? I am assuming we're
looking at raw images with a really high bit rate, and for some reason they are
showing those higher values with funky colors for some reason. Makes me wonder
what kind of post-processing is needed for each photo.

The logical thing to do is to use a high bit depth for the image, like 16 or 32
bit, but keep "normal" exposure data in the first 14 bits for example. So instead
of 0-2744 in 14bit be the same range as 0-4096 in 16 bit, the first 0-2744 in 16
bit corresponds to 1 bit data, while the rest is used for the otherwise
overexposed data, which of course requires some fancy post-processing to even the
range out to a normal image.

Or you use a 16 bit readout from the sensor (as per above), then in-camera re-
arrange that to a 14 bit range, producing a balanced image.

--
Sandman
  #3  
Old August 25th 15, 05:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,430
Default New sensor with unlimited dynamic range

In article , RichA wrote:

Alfred Molon:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~hangzhao/modulo.html When a pixel
fills up, it is automatically emptied. The camera counts the
number of times a pixel is emptied. Pixels in the darker image
areas probably never completely fill up.


Sandman:
Pretty smart, but the example images didn't really sell the
concept enough. With "unlimited" dynamic range, you'd think
nothing in the image could possibly be overexposed, but some of
the example images, while a lot better than the normal photos,
still looked like they were blown in areas. Since this "unlimited"
dynamic range only works for highlights, you also need to expose
for the darkest part of the scene. Or, if this technology would
find itself into normal Nikons and Canons, they would
automatically expose for the darkest part of the scene, while
everything else would be blown and then in-camera recovered. Not
sure what the coloring is used for in the example images? I am
assuming we're looking at raw images with a really high bit rate,
and for some reason they are showing those higher values with
funky colors for some reason. Makes me wonder what kind of
post-processing is needed for each photo. The logical thing to do
is to use a high bit depth for the image, like 16 or 32 bit, but
keep "normal" exposure data in the first 14 bits for example. So
instead of 0-2744 in 14bit be the same range as 0-4096 in 16 bit,
the first 0-2744 in 16 bit corresponds to 1 bit data, while the
rest is used for the otherwise overexposed data, which of course
requires some fancy post-processing to even the range out to a
normal image. Or you use a 16 bit readout from the sensor (as per
above), then in-camera re- arrange that to a 14 bit range,
producing a balanced image. -- Sandman


This is all fine, so when they will apply similar progress to
display technology?


That's... not the same thing at all.

--
Sandman
  #4  
Old August 26th 15, 08:01 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,430
Default New sensor with unlimited dynamic range

In article , RichA wrote:

Alfred Molon:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~hangzhao/modulo.html
When a pixel fills up, it is automatically emptied. The
camera counts the number of times a pixel is emptied.
Pixels in the darker image areas probably never completely
fill up.

Sandman:
Pretty smart, but the example images didn't really
sell the concept enough. With "unlimited" dynamic range,
you'd think nothing in the image could possibly be
overexposed, but some of the example images, while a lot
better than the normal photos, still looked like they were
blown in areas. Since this "unlimited" dynamic range only
works for highlights, you also need to expose for the darkest
part of the scene. Or, if this technology would find itself
into normal Nikons and Canons, they would automatically
expose for the darkest part of the scene, while everything
else would be blown and then in-camera recovered. Not sure
what the coloring is used for in the example images? I am
assuming we're looking at raw images with a really high bit
rate, and for some reason they are showing those higher
values with funky colors for some reason. Makes me wonder
what kind of post-processing is needed for each photo. The
logical thing to do is to use a high bit depth for the image,
like 16 or 32 bit, but keep "normal" exposure data in the
first 14 bits for example. So instead of 0-2744 in 14bit be
the same range as 0-4096 in 16 bit, the first 0-2744 in 16
bit corresponds to 1 bit data, while the rest is used for the
otherwise overexposed data, which of course requires some
fancy post-processing to even the range out to a normal
image. Or you use a 16 bit readout from the sensor (as per
above), then in-camera re- arrange that to a 14 bit range,
producing a balanced image. -- Sandman

RichA:
This is all fine, so when they will apply similar progress to
display technology?


Sandman:
That's... not the same thing at all. -- Sandman


So what good is it if the camera does it but you can't SEE the
result?


Yes you can. You just didn't understand it. Viewing HDR images doesn't require a
HDR monitor, it's all about compressing the larger dynamic range into a smaller
dynamic range.

Since the human eye barely can tell the difference between an 8bit monitor and a
10 bit monitor, there is no need for a 14 bit or 16 bit monitor. The key is
taking high bit data and showing it in the normal spectrum.

--
Sandman
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DYNAMIC RANGE LOVES THE 40D! Alan Browne Digital Photography 3 September 19th 08 01:19 PM
Dynamic Range of RAW digital sensor data Alan Browne Digital SLR Cameras 10 February 4th 07 07:03 AM
Dynamic Range of RAW digital sensor data Timo Autiokari Digital SLR Cameras 1 February 4th 07 06:44 AM
dynamic range Paul Furman Digital SLR Cameras 36 February 22nd 06 04:05 AM
Are we ignored regarding dynamic range? ThomasH Digital Photography 43 January 1st 05 11:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.