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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
... The eye is comfortable with a brightness range of ~50-100x in one scene with no pupilary/retinal adaptation, 1000:1 is viewable without noticing much adaptation - after images or time for pupil to adjust. The eye can accommodate a brightness range from reflected starlight on a field (remember clean air and no streetlights?) to sun on fresh snow (except in extreme cases, mountains, clean air ...). This about a 25 bit/zone range or ~32,000,000:1 and has no relevance to viewing a CRT. Yes. There's more light reflected from a lump of coal in sunlight than from a bowl of snow indoors. The eye/brain isn't fooled. Within a 2.0 OD range it can easily discriminate to .005 OD in the middle of the range. However, OD is logarithmic and photocells and CRTs aren't. Figure you will need about 12 bits for very good fidelity, but 8 bits looks just fine on a CRT. Numbers above are from memory, you should check with a good text on human visual response if the values are important. Negatives have close to no relation to photoptic response. Exposure and development of film are such as to yield the thinnest (least dense) negative that will yield a good print. This figure depends on scene contrast, film contrast, paper contrast and the method used to image the negative on the film. For high-resolution work, we used to dye the emulsion black to avoid exposing interior grains. After all, the image can't be in focus throughout the emulsion depth. To make the film a little faster, we would etch away the top few microns of the emulsion, leaving an exposed layer of grains, like in sandpaper. I have to confess I don't see much relevance in all this to an SEM. All you want is the range of signal that presently goes to the current analog display and be able to accommodate that. 8 bits resolution should be adequate. The question of which 8 bits can be important. I can adjust images from my 12-bit flat-bed scanner in ways that just don't apply to 8 bits. Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
I have to confess I don't see much relevance in all this to an SEM. All you want is the range of signal that presently goes to the current analog display and be able to accommodate that. 8 bits resolution should be adequate. But that is one of the attractive features of this group. ( OK, so I'm reading comp.dsp By reading one learns so much more than one narrow area of knowledge! |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Jerry Avins wrote:
Nicholas O. Lindan wrote: [snip] I have to confess I don't see much relevance in all this to an SEM. All you want is the range of signal that presently goes to the current analog display and be able to accommodate that. 8 bits resolution should be adequate. The question of which 8 bits can be important. I can adjust images from my 12-bit flat-bed scanner in ways that just don't apply to 8 bits. Jerry I think that touches on a question I raised in another subthread. Why a *FAST* *16 bit a/d* ? Would it not be more suitable to have 2 A/Ds in "parallel"? A very fast 6-8 bit A/D for use while positioning sample. A 16+ bit A/D for analytical output. Caveat Lector ;} |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Jerry Avins" wrote in message ... SNIP There's more light reflected from a lump of coal in sunlight than from a bowl of snow indoors. The eye/brain isn't fooled. See e.g. http://web.mit.edu/persci/people/adelson/checkershadow_illusion.html Bart |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Jeff miller
wrote: How about for CRT's? Deos it depend in part on the design and construction of the CRT, and do dedicated monochrome CRTs have a greater dynamic range for greyscale than color CRT's used to display greyscale images? As others have said, you should capture and manipulate your original images at the highest bit depth you can handle, but what is usually transmitted by TV companies, recorded on DVDs, or saved in JPG files for display on CRTs is based on 8 bit linear coding after gamma correction, and it generally looks just fine. i.e. 8 bits seems to be quite sufficient for display. From personal observation, dynamic range of monochrome and colour CRTs are about the same, though the detail resolution can be slightly higher on a monochrome CRT displaying a monochrome signal. Rod. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Richard Owlett wrote:
Jerry Avins wrote: Nicholas O. Lindan wrote: [snip] I have to confess I don't see much relevance in all this to an SEM. All you want is the range of signal that presently goes to the current analog display and be able to accommodate that. 8 bits resolution should be adequate. The question of which 8 bits can be important. I can adjust images from my 12-bit flat-bed scanner in ways that just don't apply to 8 bits. Jerry I think that touches on a question I raised in another subthread. Why a *FAST* *16 bit a/d* ? Would it not be more suitable to have 2 A/Ds in "parallel"? A very fast 6-8 bit A/D for use while positioning sample. A 16+ bit A/D for analytical output. Caveat Lector ;} Hmmm.... I'd thought about that but not to those extremes: in fact it makes much more sense at the extremes you suggest and I may well incorporate the idea. It will also give me a chance to jump-start the project before I have the funds for the higher performance A/D. Interestingly enough the 16 bit 5MSPS sigma-delta A/D I was thinking about has a 10MSPS "turbo" mode with 14 bit resolution. This thread is providing some very useful information about SNR of media and human eyes... keep it coming! |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Roderick Stewart wrote:
In article , Jeff miller wrote: How about for CRT's? Deos it depend in part on the design and construction of the CRT, and do dedicated monochrome CRTs have a greater dynamic range for greyscale than color CRT's used to display greyscale images? As others have said, you should capture and manipulate your original images at the highest bit depth you can handle, but what is usually transmitted by TV companies, recorded on DVDs, or saved in JPG files for display on CRTs is based on 8 bit linear coding after gamma correction, and it generally looks just fine. i.e. 8 bits seems to be quite sufficient for display. From personal observation, dynamic range of monochrome and colour CRTs are about the same, though the detail resolution can be slightly higher on a monochrome CRT displaying a monochrome signal. Rod. Yes good point as there is no "dot pitch" issue. -Jeff |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
jeff miller wrote:
This thread is providing some very useful information about SNR of media and human eyes... keep it coming! See: Notes on the Resolution of the Human Eye How many megapixels equivalent does the eye have? The Sensitivity of the Human Eye (ISO Equivalent) The Dynamic Range of the Eye The Focal Length of the Eye: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...esolution.html Contrast thresholds data: http://www.clarkvision.com/visastro/omva1/index.html Roger |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
jeff miller wrote: This thread is providing some very useful information about SNR of media and human eyes... keep it coming! See: Notes on the Resolution of the Human Eye How many megapixels equivalent does the eye have? The Sensitivity of the Human Eye (ISO Equivalent) The Dynamic Range of the Eye The Focal Length of the Eye: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...esolution.html Contrast thresholds data: http://www.clarkvision.com/visastro/omva1/index.html Roger Great resource. Based on that data, I'd conclude that images captured from my microscope might benefit for 65K x 65K resolution, so I'll use 16 bit D/A's to drive my scanning coils. Of course that kind or resolution can only be rendered in print. And represents an 8GB file size. And will take 2 hours to collect.... but might as well build it in. The figure of 10,000:1 dynamic range in any "one view" corresponds to about 12 bits. That's pretty much exactly the nominal dynamic range I've heard quoted for the front end of an SEM. But it might seems no current reproduction technology acheives quite that. -Jeff |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Jeff
If you have a set of 40 cards with gradations of gray going from black to white about 90% of the population will be able to lay them on a table sorted into the correct order. If you increase the number of cards to 64 about 2/3 will be able to sort them correctly. If you up the number to 80 the number of people that can sort them drops to something like 20% and by the time you get to 128 cards almost nobody can put them in the right order. I'm recalling this from memory but the numbers are something like that. The sensitivity to brightness for film and the human eye is not strictly linear. That is even when you give people 128 cards with linear gradations of grayscale cards to sort there are certain ranges of brightness wherein they will mostly get it right. So 8 bits (256 brightness levels) will pretty much handle the non-linearty of both the display and the viewer. That is, most people will not be able to see the difference between any two adjacent gray levels. If your next question is - Is it spelled "grey" or "gray"? I don't know :} -jim jeff miller wrote: I'm converting my old analog scanning electron microscopes to digital/pc based. One of the important questions is how many bits of resolution ie: levels of greyscale are required. I've heard the analog front ends of the scopes have a maximum SNR of about 72 dB, or 12 effective bits, and to give me some flexibility for digital image processing that's about what I'll shoot for: a bit better if I can get it. But on the other end of the scale, I'm wondering what are accepted figures for signal to noise or dynamic range of various display technologies, and of the human eye. It seems to me the published "contrast" figures for LCD displays of about 600:1 peg them at about 49dB dynamic range. What is generally accepted for B&W film? Is it highly dependent on film type and processing? Anyone know some typical figures for various processes? Is "silver print," which in my mind is marked by high contrast, a special technique or just a fancy word for black and white? How about for CRT's? Deos it depend in part on the design and construction of the CRT, and do dedicated monochrome CRTs have a greater dynamic range for greyscale than color CRT's used to display greyscale images? And what about the human eye, for that matter? It's been suggested the human eye has only about 6 bits or 36 dB dynamic range/SNR for greyscale images. Is that about right? Bonus question: I know the sensitivity of the human eye varies with color, being most sensitive at about 555 nM green. How about dynamic range and SNR? Deos it vary with color, too? Thanks! -Jeff ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What are accepted figures for signal/noise (SNR) and dynamic rangefor CRT? LCD? Film? Human eye? | jeff miller | Digital Photography | 40 | March 10th 05 11:03 PM |