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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Catching All The Details In High Dynamic Range Pictures W/O Multiple Exposures
Here's a thought on processing those pixels of info that comprise a picture (TAKEN with just one picture cycle) . Integrate each time period with an exposure of x seconds. take next picture in camera, in intervals of readings between time x1 and time x2. Continue on with differentials of image gathering by watching the cells as they collect photons of light in specified time periods. Make the sampling period vary according to the dynamic range of the picture i.e. the more photons collected should kick in a formula for desensitizing the sensor when a certain plateau of brighness is reached. It's like compressing the low and high ends to better represent actual camera dynamic range with what is actually being seen. I don't know if monitors can represent the full range of colors and intensities, but there should be some kind of tradeoff between squeezing picture brightness/darkness towards a more palipable realistic look and getting a picture that actually looks like what it did when you took it. Pointers on photograpy tips appreciated. Thanks. -- __ SneakyP To email me, you know what to do. Supernews, if you get a complaint from a Jamie Baillie, please see: http://www.canadianisp.ca/jamie_baillie.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Catching All The Details In High Dynamic Range Pictures W/O Multiple Exposures
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:35:42 -0500, SneakyP
wrote: Here's a thought on processing those pixels of info that comprise a picture (TAKEN with just one picture cycle) . Integrate each time period with an exposure of x seconds. take next picture in camera, in intervals of readings between time x1 and time x2. Continue on with differentials of image gathering by watching the cells as they collect photons of light in specified time periods. Make the sampling period vary according to the dynamic range of the picture i.e. the more photons collected should kick in a formula for desensitizing the sensor when a certain plateau of brighness is reached. It's like compressing the low and high ends to better represent actual camera dynamic range with what is actually being seen. I don't know if monitors can represent the full range of colors and intensities, but there should be some kind of tradeoff between squeezing picture brightness/darkness towards a more palipable realistic look and getting a picture that actually looks like what it did when you took it. Pointers on photograpy tips appreciated. Thanks. Here's a good tip ... take your medication. You don't have one clue how imaging sensors work and are blathering on senselessly about something that can't happen. But even more importantly, doesn't need to happen. You don't even know about monitors. How much more of your life do you waste like this? All of it? 95% of it? More? Less? Here's another tip: If you want to see images in the real world in a realistic representation (full dynamic range), get out of your mommy's basement where you live in that imaginary world that you've invented between your ears. Then you won't have to try to manipulate others to try to bring it to you in high-resolution glimpses of what you've always been too afraid to go see on your own out in the real world. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Catching All The Details In High Dynamic Range Pictures W/OMultiple Exposures
SneakyP wrote:
Here's a thought on processing those pixels of info that comprise a picture (TAKEN with just one picture cycle) . Integrate each time period with an exposure of x seconds. take next picture in camera, in intervals of readings between time x1 and time x2. Continue on with differentials of image gathering by watching the cells as they collect photons of light in specified time periods. Make the sampling period vary according to the dynamic range of the picture i.e. the more photons collected should kick in a formula for desensitizing the sensor when a certain plateau of brighness is reached. It's like compressing the low and high ends to better represent actual camera dynamic range with what is actually being seen. I don't know if monitors can represent the full range of colors and intensities, but there should be some kind of tradeoff between squeezing picture brightness/darkness towards a more palipable realistic look and getting a picture that actually looks like what it did when you took it. Nice idea, won't work. First, reading the cell empties it irrevocably. Second, how do you handle moving objects? Third, each reading causes read noise. Fourth, it's kinda hard to read single cells ... for now you must live with a complete sensor read. -Wolfgang |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Catching All The Details In High Dynamic Range Pictures W/O MultipleExposures
On 16/09/2010 12:40, ransley wrote:
On Sep 16, 1:35 am, wrote: Here's a thought on processing those pixels of info that comprise a picture (TAKEN with just one picture cycle) . Integrate each time period with an exposure of x seconds. take next picture in camera, in intervals of readings between time x1 and time x2. Continue on with differentials of image gathering by watching the cells as they collect photons of light in specified time periods. Make the sampling period vary according to the dynamic range of the picture i.e. the more photons collected should kick in a formula for desensitizing the sensor when a certain plateau of brighness is reached. It's like compressing the low and high ends to better represent actual camera dynamic range with what is actually being seen. I don't know if monitors can represent the full range of colors and intensities, but there should be some kind of tradeoff between squeezing picture brightness/darkness towards a more palipable realistic look and getting a picture that actually looks like what it did when you took it. Pointers on photograpy tips appreciated. Thanks. -- __ SneakyP To email me, you know what to do. Supernews, if you get a complaint from a Jamie Baillie, please see:http://www.canadianisp.ca/jamie_baillie.html Yea, watch cells as they collect photons of light, you are smokin some good stuff. Actually that device is a real invention dating back to the late 1970's and called the Image Photon Counting System. Cunning system design and obvious limitations. Developed by Alan Boksenberg at Imperial College London during the 1970's and derivatives are still in use today at ING and a few other large observatories for specialised low signal imaging. Obviously it is useless at high light levels you have to be able to count each photon arrival and determine the centroid of the spot. http://www.ing.iac.es/Astronomy/obse...00000000000000 Smoking good stuff is not required. It was absolutely ground breaking when it first came out and was nick-named Instant Paper Creation System. Compared to film it was streets ahead in sensitivity and noise floor and it was pretty good for a while after CCDs became available to astronomers too. It still beats CCDs on noise floor for some work. Regards, Martin Brown |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Catching All The Details In High Dynamic Range Pictures W/O MultipleExposures
On 9/16/2010 2:51 AM, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:35:42 -0500, SneakyP wrote: Here's a thought on processing those pixels of info that comprise a picture (TAKEN with just one picture cycle) . Integrate each time period with an exposure of x seconds. take next picture in camera, in intervals of readings between time x1 and time x2. Continue on with differentials of image gathering by watching the cells as they collect photons of light in specified time periods. Make the sampling period vary according to the dynamic range of the picture i.e. the more photons collected should kick in a formula for desensitizing the sensor when a certain plateau of brighness is reached. It's like compressing the low and high ends to better represent actual camera dynamic range with what is actually being seen. I don't know if monitors can represent the full range of colors and intensities, but there should be some kind of tradeoff between squeezing picture brightness/darkness towards a more palipable realistic look and getting a picture that actually looks like what it did when you took it. Pointers on photograpy tips appreciated. Thanks. Here's a good tip ... take your medication. You don't have one clue how imaging sensors work and are blathering on senselessly about something that can't happen. But even more importantly, doesn't need to happen. You don't even know about monitors. How much more of your life do you waste like this? All of it? 95% of it? More? Less? Here's another tip: If you want to see images in the real world in a realistic representation (full dynamic range), get out of your mommy's basement where you live in that imaginary world that you've invented between your ears. Then you won't have to try to manipulate others to try to bring it to you in high-resolution glimpses of what you've always been too afraid to go see on your own out in the real world. Well either the op is very smart or I'm very dumb, because I haven't the foggiest idea what he's talking about. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Catching All The Details In High Dynamic Range Pictures W/O MultipleExposures
Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
wrote: Here's a thought on processing those pixels of info that comprise a picture (TAKEN with just one picture cycle) . Integrate each time period with an exposure of x seconds. take next picture in camera, in intervals of readings between time x1 and time x2. Continue on with differentials of image gathering by watching the cells as they collect photons of light in specified time periods. Make the sampling period vary according to the dynamic range of the picture i.e. the more photons collected should kick in a formula for desensitizing the sensor when a certain plateau of brighness is reached. It's like compressing the low and high ends to better represent actual camera dynamic range with what is actually being seen. I don't know if monitors can represent the full range of colors and intensities, but there should be some kind of tradeoff between squeezing picture brightness/darkness towards a more palipable realistic look and getting a picture that actually looks like what it did when you took it. Nice idea, won't work. First, reading the cell empties it irrevocably. Second, how do you handle moving objects? Third, each reading causes read noise. Fourth, it's kinda hard to read single cells ... for now you must live with a complete sensor read. What I got out of this is bracket & pick the brightest exposure that doesn't blow out. To some extent, you can use the histogram but that'll be some particular raw conversion to jpeg so not entirely reliable. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Catching All The Details In High Dynamic Range Pictures W/O Multiple Exposures
In article , Wolfgang
Weisselberg writes Nice idea, won't work. First, reading the cell empties it irrevocably. True with CCDs, not true with CMOS. CMOS specifically needs to be reset before each new exposure because the read process is non-destructive. There are many other reasons why it won't work, or would be difficult to implement, but destructive read isn't one of them. -- Kennedy Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed; A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed. Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Catching All The Details In High Dynamic Range Pictures W/O Multiple Exposures
ransley wrote in
: On Sep 16, 8:53*am, Martin Brown wrote: On 16/09/2010 12:40, ransley wrote: On Sep 16, 1:35 am, wrote: Here's a thought on processing those pixels of info that comprise a pi cture (TAKEN with just one picture cycle) . *Integrate each time period wi th an exposure of x seconds. take next picture in camera, in intervals of readings between time x1 and time x2. *Continue on with differential s of image gathering by watching the cells as they collect photons of light in specified time periods. Make the sampling period vary according to the dynamic range of the picture i.e. the more photons collected should ki ck in a formula for desensitizing the sensor when a certain plateau of brigh ness is reached. *It's like compressing the low and high ends to better represent actual camera dynamic range with what is actually being seen . *I don't know if monitors can represent the full range of colors and intensities, but there should be some kind of tradeoff between squeezi ng picture brightness/darkness towards a more palipable realistic look an d getting a picture that actually looks like what it did when you took i t. Pointers on photograpy tips appreciated. * Thanks. -- __ SneakyP To email me, you know what to do. Supernews, if you get a complaint from a Jamie Baillie, please see:htt p://www.canadianisp.ca/jamie_baillie.html Yea, watch cells as they collect photons of light, you are smokin some good stuff. Actually that device is a real invention dating back to the late 1970's and called the Image Photon Counting System. Cunning system design and obvious limitations. Developed by Alan Boksenberg at Imperial College London during the 1970's and derivatives are still in use today at ING and a few other large observatories for specialised low signal imaging. Obviously it is useless at high light levels you have to be able to count each photon arrival and determine the centroid of the spot. http://www.ing.iac.es/Astronomy/obse...manuals/genera. .. Smoking good stuff is not required. It was absolutely ground breaking when it first came out and was nick-named Instant Paper Creation System. Compared to film it was streets ahead in sensitivity and noise floor and it was pretty good for a while after CCDs became available to astronomers too. It still beats CCDs on noise floor for some work. Regards, Martin Brown- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I believe he was implying using his self endowed power to view photons. No powers endowed here. The last thing needed were the snooty replies. I was merely talking about a concept: 1. Has to be a way to capture a picture of higher dynamic ranges without resorting to combining two or more different sessions. Nobody seems to understand that. 2. Since pictures are composed of the collective pixel bed of cells that "collect" photons as discrete data storage vs. physical film analog storage, I'da figured the mathematics of adding all the data from each cell may increase the range of captured light intensity to help distinguish between what is seen in the real world vs. what is seen in camera world. Dynamic range is extended. I know, for instance, that highlight detail compression is nothing more than applying a curve to the highest intensity light, to recreate differences between levels and keeping the dark tones from becoming black at the same time. Hence, the highlight blowout is avoided by highlight recovery (same difference in the process). The more range a pixel sensor is allowed to store, the less needed to flush it. But seeing that a high dynamic range picture doesn't work well with these kinds of sensor usages, why not enable the read/store of data to a bank and then re-read the next cycle to add to the prior read set of data. The real range of RGB shouldn't have to restricted to a range of colors (2^8 values per channel) and extrapolate those to a screen that by its nature can only handle 8bit. They should be beyond that, but some seem to think that the range is adequate. I'd say, no, I want a picture where you can bump up the intensity to see what's in the shadows without having (noise) show up badly, or tune down the intensity to a point where highlited/detailed stuff is revealed instead of lost in blown-out white pixels. Just saying. When does that kind of camera processing come out? Even our eyes have adaptive seeing= they don't blow out highlights when seeing the shadows in the same field of vision. Our eyesight seems rather logarithmic as far as compressing dark from light and seeing a darkened area next to a well lit area. Cameras don't have the ability to emulate that kind of seeing. -- __ SneakyP To email me, you know what to do. Supernews, if you get a complaint from a Jamie Baillie, please see: http://www.canadianisp.ca/jamie_baillie.html |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Catching All The Details In High Dynamic Range Pictures W/O Multiple Exposures
On 2010-09-22 05:21:07 -0700, Whisky-dave said:
I want free food and free sex..... and a car[1] that drives and parks itself. So, you have fantasies of being a teenager again? Fed at home, sex, well... you have to go for those youthful targets of opportunity, and the driving problem can be solved by having all sorts of folks (parents, friends, etc.) do that driving and parking for you. [1] apparently ford has a car that can park itself. Not only Ford, there are several high end cars which have parking systems I believe the most prominent among them being Lexus with some of their high-end models. I seem to remember a "TopGear" episode featuring the auto-parking system. -- Regards, Savageduck |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A question about digital cameras which can capture the most dynamic range of light exposures. | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 0 | October 14th 07 04:52 AM |
A question about digital cameras which can capture the most dynamic range of light exposures. | [email protected] | Other Photographic Equipment | 0 | October 14th 07 04:52 AM |
Multiple read technique extends dynamic range of small sensors | Alfred Molon[_2_] | Digital Photography | 16 | March 14th 07 02:49 AM |
high dynamic range in P&S ?? | minnesotti | Digital Photography | 4 | October 27th 06 03:03 AM |
How best to see very high dynamic range images | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 6 | August 5th 06 11:08 PM |