High Dynamic-Range Image Sensor

http://tinyurl.com/gvunpuw

"A pixel array within an integrated-circuit image sensor is exposed
to light representative of a scene during a first frame interval
and then oversampled a first number of times within the first frame
interval to generate a corresponding first number of frames of
image data from which a first output image may be constructed. One
or more of the first number of frames of image data are evaluated
to determine whether a range of luminances in the scene warrants
adjustment of an oversampling factor from the first number to a
second number, if so, the oversampling factor is adjusted such that
the pixel array is oversampled the second number of times within a
second frame interval to generate a corresponding second number of
frames of image data from which a second output image may be
constructed."
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 08/11/2016 11:27, Eric Stevens wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/gvunpuw

"A pixel array within an integrated-circuit image sensor is exposed
to light representative of a scene during a first frame interval
and then oversampled a first number of times within the first frame
interval to generate a corresponding first number of frames of
image data from which a first output image may be constructed. One
or more of the first number of frames of image data are evaluated
to determine whether a range of luminances in the scene warrants
adjustment of an oversampling factor from the first number to a
second number, if so, the oversampling factor is adjusted such that
the pixel array is oversampled the second number of times within a
second frame interval to generate a corresponding second number of
frames of image data from which a second output image may be
constructed."

Not very "innovative" IMO, and probably just patent trolling.

On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 12:06:29 +1300, Me wrote:

On 08/11/2016 11:27, Eric Stevens wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/gvunpuw

"A pixel array within an integrated-circuit image sensor is exposed
to light representative of a scene during a first frame interval
and then oversampled a first number of times within the first frame
interval to generate a corresponding first number of frames of
image data from which a first output image may be constructed. One
or more of the first number of frames of image data are evaluated
to determine whether a range of luminances in the scene warrants
adjustment of an oversampling factor from the first number to a
second number, if so, the oversampling factor is adjusted such that
the pixel array is oversampled the second number of times within a
second frame interval to generate a corresponding second number of
frames of image data from which a second output image may be
constructed."

Not very "innovative" IMO, and probably just patent trolling.

I hjaven't heard of anyone actually putting this into practice the way
the patent describes (but that doesn't mean much).

Rambus is not a patent troll, although they have been accused of that
in the past.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Wouldn't it be simpler and faster to take two exposures, one
underexposed and one overexposed, and combine them in camera to generate
a high dynamic range RAW?

--
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

On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 18:55:36 +0100, Alfred Molon
wrote:

Wouldn't it be simpler and faster to take two exposures, one
underexposed and one overexposed, and combine them in camera to generate
a high dynamic range RAW?

This seems to be just another way of doing just that with the
sensor/processor outputting but a single raw file which covers the
dynamic range. Think of it as just another step up on autoexposure.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2016-11-08 22:17:29 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 18:55:36 +0100, Alfred Molon
wrote:

Wouldn't it be simpler and faster to take two exposures, one
underexposed and one overexposed, and combine them in camera to generate
a high dynamic range RAW?

This seems to be just another way of doing just that with the
sensor/processor outputting but a single raw file which covers the
dynamic range. Think of it as just another step up on autoexposure.

Why not just develop a 32-bit sensor?
--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:41:16 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-11-08 22:17:29 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 18:55:36 +0100, Alfred Molon
wrote:

Wouldn't it be simpler and faster to take two exposures, one
underexposed and one overexposed, and combine them in camera to generate
a high dynamic range RAW?

This seems to be just another way of doing just that with the
sensor/processor outputting but a single raw file which covers the
dynamic range. Think of it as just another step up on autoexposure.

Why not just develop a 32-bit sensor?

That would not overcome the inherent limits to the dynamic range of
whatever sensor technology they were using. The patent describes a way
of constructing a HDR image from within whatever limits the sensor
might have.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 9 Nov 2016 01:51:56 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave
wrote:

On Tuesday, 8 November 2016 22:41:24 UTC, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-11-08 22:17:29 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 18:55:36 +0100, Alfred Molon
wrote:

Wouldn't it be simpler and faster to take two exposures, one
underexposed and one overexposed, and combine them in camera to generate
a high dynamic range RAW?

This seems to be just another way of doing just that with the
sensor/processor outputting but a single raw file which covers the
dynamic range. Think of it as just another step up on autoexposure.

Why not just develop a 32-bit sensor?
--
Regards,

Savageduck

Maybe they havent; got the processing power to sample all those bits in a reasonable amount of time maybe in a few years time.

Very possibly true. Rambus have a habit of being way ahead of current
technology when developing their concepts. But they have to be able to
build a working model when they file for patents but it doesn't have
to be practicable or commercially viable at that time.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 11/10/2016 4:48 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 20:26:20 UTC, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Wed, 9 Nov 2016 01:51:56 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave
wrote:

On Tuesday, 8 November 2016 22:41:24 UTC, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-11-08 22:17:29 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 18:55:36 +0100, Alfred Molon
wrote:

Wouldn't it be simpler and faster to take two exposures, one
underexposed and one overexposed, and combine them in camera to generate
a high dynamic range RAW?

This seems to be just another way of doing just that with the
sensor/processor outputting but a single raw file which covers the
dynamic range. Think of it as just another step up on autoexposure.

Why not just develop a 32-bit sensor?
--
Regards,

Savageduck

Maybe they havent; got the processing power to sample all those bits in a reasonable amount of time maybe in a few years time.

Very possibly true. Rambus have a habit of being way ahead of current
technology when developing their concepts. But they have to be able to
build a working model when they file for patents but it doesn't have
to be practicable or commercially viable at that time.

Yep, nike patented self tying laces in 2008 released in 2016 limited edition I think, I'm not joining the queue for them. I'll wait for the IoT version so I can tie them using a smartphone :-)


There have been many mornings when I wish I had them on all of my shoes.

--
PeterN