Major sensor technology developments

In article , Ron C
wrote:

It also doesn't address what becomes of the
photons rejected by the [narrow or wide] RGB
filters.

Those obviously are lost in a Bayer sensor.

That's always been my understanding.

I'm trying to get a grip on nospam's continual
insistence that "all photons are captured by at least
one sensel" frequently followed by "nothing is wasted."

you're assuming that a sensel works in isolation. that's false.

obviously, one sensel in isolation will capture only one component and
'waste' the other two. bayer sensors do not work that way.

a bayer sensor uses *all* sensels for the entire image. nothing is
wasted.

each sensel uses itself and its neighbors (as many as 25 in typical
implementations) to accurately measure one component and calculate the
other two. subject detail spans more than one sensel, thereby
guaranteeing that nothing is 'wasted' and detail is accurately
measured. it works exceptionally well.

a better way to think about bayer is *not* as an rgb device, but as a
luma/chroma device, which samples luminance at the full rate of the
sensor and chrominance at half the rate. the colour of each sensel does
not matter and the eye can't resolve that much chroma detail anyway.

foveon samples both luma and chroma at the same rate, but since bayer
is already resolving more chroma detail than the eye can see, foveon is
trying to solve a problem that doesn't actually exist.

~~
I suspect a problem with definitions and terminology
that is creating a communication barrier.

more accurately that some people don't fully understand how it works.

On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 20:23:47 +0100, Alfred Molon
wrote:

In article x4qdnQRdUaQ-fBPBnZ2dnUU7-
, says...
It also doesn't address what becomes of the
photons rejected by the [narrow or wide] RGB
filters.

Those obviously are lost in a Bayer sensor.

Not according to nospam.

I think it's time to ignore him on this subject.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 20:23:50 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Ron C
wrote:

It also doesn't address what becomes of the
photons rejected by the [narrow or wide] RGB
filters.

Those obviously are lost in a Bayer sensor.

That's always been my understanding.

I'm trying to get a grip on nospam's continual
insistence that "all photons are captured by at least
one sensel" frequently followed by "nothing is wasted."

you're assuming that a sensel works in isolation. that's false.

obviously, one sensel in isolation will capture only one component and
'waste' the other two. bayer sensors do not work that way.

a bayer sensor uses *all* sensels for the entire image. nothing is
wasted.

No sensel is ated, certainly. But some photons must inevitably fall on
photons of a different color sensitivity. Such photons do not pass the
sensel's colour filter. Nor are they diveryed to a sensel of the
appropriate color sensitivity. In other words they do not get used to
help creat an image. i.e. they are wasted.

each sensel uses itself and its neighbors (as many as 25 in typical
implementations) to accurately measure one component and calculate the
other two. subject detail spans more than one sensel, thereby
guaranteeing that nothing is 'wasted' and detail is accurately
measured. it works exceptionally well.

You confusing wastage of sensel information with wastage of photons.
Some photons must inevitably fail to find their way into a sensel's
trap.

a better way to think about bayer is *not* as an rgb device, but as a
luma/chroma device, which samples luminance at the full rate of the
sensor and chrominance at half the rate. the colour of each sensel does
not matter and the eye can't resolve that much chroma detail anyway.

foveon samples both luma and chroma at the same rate, but since bayer
is already resolving more chroma detail than the eye can see, foveon is
trying to solve a problem that doesn't actually exist.

Foveon has nothing to with this matter.

~~
I suspect a problem with definitions and terminology
that is creating a communication barrier.

more accurately that some people don't fully understand how it works.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


I'm trying to get a grip on nospam's continual
insistence that "all photons are captured by at least
one sensel" frequently followed by "nothing is wasted."

you're assuming that a sensel works in isolation. that's false.

obviously, one sensel in isolation will capture only one component and
'waste' the other two. bayer sensors do not work that way.

a bayer sensor uses *all* sensels for the entire image. nothing is
wasted.

No sensel is ated, certainly. But some photons must inevitably fall on
photons of a different color sensitivity. Such photons do not pass the
sensel's colour filter. Nor are they diveryed to a sensel of the
appropriate color sensitivity. In other words they do not get used to
help creat an image. i.e. they are wasted.

they are not wasted. nothing is wasted.

again, if there was any waste, there would be losses and there are not.
the sensor's qe would be lower, for one, and it isn't. colours would be
wrong and they aren't.

each sensel uses itself and its neighbors (as many as 25 in typical
implementations) to accurately measure one component and calculate the
other two. subject detail spans more than one sensel, thereby
guaranteeing that nothing is 'wasted' and detail is accurately
measured. it works exceptionally well.

You confusing wastage of sensel information with wastage of photons.
Some photons must inevitably fail to find their way into a sensel's
trap.

i'm not the least bit confused about this.

a better way to think about bayer is *not* as an rgb device, but as a
luma/chroma device, which samples luminance at the full rate of the
sensor and chrominance at half the rate. the colour of each sensel does
not matter and the eye can't resolve that much chroma detail anyway.

foveon samples both luma and chroma at the same rate, but since bayer
is already resolving more chroma detail than the eye can see, foveon is
trying to solve a problem that doesn't actually exist.

Foveon has nothing to with this matter.

it's a point of comparison.

On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 21:43:05 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


I'm trying to get a grip on nospam's continual
insistence that "all photons are captured by at least
one sensel" frequently followed by "nothing is wasted."

you're assuming that a sensel works in isolation. that's false.

obviously, one sensel in isolation will capture only one component and
'waste' the other two. bayer sensors do not work that way.

a bayer sensor uses *all* sensels for the entire image. nothing is
wasted.

No sensel is ated, certainly. But some photons must inevitably fall on
photons of a different color sensitivity. Such photons do not pass the
sensel's colour filter. Nor are they diveryed to a sensel of the
appropriate color sensitivity. In other words they do not get used to
help creat an image. i.e. they are wasted.

they are not wasted. nothing is wasted.

again, if there was any waste, there would be losses and there are not.
the sensor's qe would be lower, for one, and it isn't. colours would be
wrong and they aren't.

Colours and levels don't enter the picture (pun) until after the raw
sensor data undergoes considerable processing.

each sensel uses itself and its neighbors (as many as 25 in typical
implementations) to accurately measure one component and calculate the
other two. subject detail spans more than one sensel, thereby
guaranteeing that nothing is 'wasted' and detail is accurately
measured. it works exceptionally well.

You confusing wastage of sensel information with wastage of photons.
Some photons must inevitably fail to find their way into a sensel's
trap.

i'm not the least bit confused about this.

a better way to think about bayer is *not* as an rgb device, but as a
luma/chroma device, which samples luminance at the full rate of the
sensor and chrominance at half the rate. the colour of each sensel does
not matter and the eye can't resolve that much chroma detail anyway.

foveon samples both luma and chroma at the same rate, but since bayer
is already resolving more chroma detail than the eye can see, foveon is
trying to solve a problem that doesn't actually exist.

Foveon has nothing to with this matter.

it's a point of comparison.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I'm trying to get a grip on nospam's continual
insistence that "all photons are captured by at least
one sensel" frequently followed by "nothing is wasted."

you're assuming that a sensel works in isolation. that's false.

obviously, one sensel in isolation will capture only one component and
'waste' the other two. bayer sensors do not work that way.

a bayer sensor uses *all* sensels for the entire image. nothing is
wasted.

No sensel is ated, certainly. But some photons must inevitably fall on
photons of a different color sensitivity. Such photons do not pass the
sensel's colour filter. Nor are they diveryed to a sensel of the
appropriate color sensitivity. In other words they do not get used to
help creat an image. i.e. they are wasted.

they are not wasted. nothing is wasted.

again, if there was any waste, there would be losses and there are not.
the sensor's qe would be lower, for one, and it isn't. colours would be
wrong and they aren't.

Colours and levels don't enter the picture (pun) until after the raw
sensor data undergoes considerable processing.

in other words, no wasted photons.

On 3/18/2019 5:35 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

full colour
info at any pixel resulting in less colour aliasing =
high effective sensor resolution.

except that foevon cameras omit the anti-alias filter, resulting in
*more* aliasing, not less.

they also lie about the number of pixels in an attempt to fool people
into thinking the sensor is better than it actually is, resulting in
the effective resolution being *less* than competing cameras.


Like the Nikon 800E

https://www.lifepixel.com/photography-gear/anti-aliasing-low-pass-filter-removal

And high quality MF cameras.

the nikon d800e and mf cameras have a significantly higher sampling
frequency to where an aa filter is not critical. there are occasional
artifacts, but it's rare.

the sigma cameras sample at a *much* lower rate and overrun with
artifacts.



You have made my point.

--
PeterN

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 06:55:35 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I'm trying to get a grip on nospam's continual
insistence that "all photons are captured by at least
one sensel" frequently followed by "nothing is wasted."

you're assuming that a sensel works in isolation. that's false.

obviously, one sensel in isolation will capture only one component and
'waste' the other two. bayer sensors do not work that way.

a bayer sensor uses *all* sensels for the entire image. nothing is
wasted.

No sensel is ated, certainly. But some photons must inevitably fall on
photons of a different color sensitivity. Such photons do not pass the
sensel's colour filter. Nor are they diveryed to a sensel of the
appropriate color sensitivity. In other words they do not get used to
help creat an image. i.e. they are wasted.

they are not wasted. nothing is wasted.

again, if there was any waste, there would be losses and there are not.
the sensor's qe would be lower, for one, and it isn't. colours would be
wrong and they aren't.

Colours and levels don't enter the picture (pun) until after the raw
sensor data undergoes considerable processing.

in other words, no wasted photons.

But only after they have been caught.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens