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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
I have found that from russia you can have tilt and shift lenses:
http://www.rugift.com/index.html which are not so expensive. -- Juha Heinonen FINLAND Mobile: +358 405492347 E-mail: URL: http://personal.inet.fi/koti/juha.heinonen |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
I have found that from russia you can have tilt and shift lenses:
http://www.rugift.com/index.html which are not so expensive. -- Juha Heinonen FINLAND Mobile: +358 405492347 E-mail: URL: http://personal.inet.fi/koti/juha.heinonen |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
Mr.T wrote:
"John A." wrote in message ... As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left a half a pixel for the second shot. :-) I wonder if any of the cameras with in-body image stabilization could be firmware-hacked to do that. No way could they move only half a pixel, including vibration, unless by accident :-) You have no idea what translation resolution is. -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. -- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
"Chris Malcolm" wrote in message ... | In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Mr.T MrT@home wrote: | | "John A." wrote in message | ... | As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left | a half a pixel for the second shot. :-) | | I wonder if any of the cameras with in-body image stabilization could | be firmware-hacked to do that. | | No way could they move only half a pixel, including vibration, unless by | accident :-) | | I don't know whether any of the current in-body stabilisers can | actually do it, but very similar technology has been employed for | decades now to adjust the position of slides in automated microscopy, | and that technology is certainly capable of well under half a pixel | adjustments. and moving half a pixel gives you..? moving 2 might give something useful |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
"k" wrote in message ... and moving half a pixel gives you..? Theoretically some of the information you lost in between pixels. moving 2 might give something useful What, a few hundred extra pixels in image size? Far better to move a full screens worth in that case! MrT. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 01:32:10 -0500, John A. wrote:
and moving half a pixel gives you..? moving 2 might give something useful Moving a half pixel horizontally, then vertically, then back horizontally for a total of four exposures would give full coverage for each color in a Bayer pattern. (Double coverage for green, actually.) Moving 1/2 pixel isn't enough. Starting from a point centrally located between 4 pixels, one way for a movable filter array to have each filter color reach of the 4 pixels would be : 0. Move down 1/2 pixel and right 1/2 pixel 1. Click! Move up 1 full pixel 2. Click! Move left 1 full pixel 3. Click! Move down 1 full pixel 4. Click! Move right 1 full pixel 5. Go to #1 for each successive photo The same four positions could also be reached by either shifting or rotating the filter array along a circular path, where the diameter of the circle would be equal to the distance between 2 non-adjacent pixels, presumably the distance between an Red/Blue pair or a Green/Green pair. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 03:40:39 -0500, ASAAR wrote:
On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 01:32:10 -0500, John A. wrote: and moving half a pixel gives you..? moving 2 might give something useful Moving a half pixel horizontally, then vertically, then back horizontally for a total of four exposures would give full coverage for each color in a Bayer pattern. (Double coverage for green, actually.) Moving 1/2 pixel isn't enough. Starting from a point centrally located between 4 pixels, one way for a movable filter array to have each filter color reach of the 4 pixels would be : 0. Move down 1/2 pixel and right 1/2 pixel 1. Click! Move up 1 full pixel 2. Click! Move left 1 full pixel 3. Click! Move down 1 full pixel 4. Click! Move right 1 full pixel 5. Go to #1 for each successive photo The same four positions could also be reached by either shifting or rotating the filter array along a circular path, where the diameter of the circle would be equal to the distance between 2 non-adjacent pixels, presumably the distance between an Red/Blue pair or a Green/Green pair. On a Bayer-filtered sensor 1/2 pixel = 1 photosite. In your sequence remove step "0" (which is pretty much meaningless) and replace "pixel" with "photosite" and you've pretty much got what I've described. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
In article , John A.
wrote: On a Bayer-filtered sensor 1/2 pixel = 1 photosite. that's incorrect. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 18:24:05 GMT, John A. wrote:
On a Bayer-filtered sensor 1/2 pixel = 1 photosite. In your sequence remove step "0" (which is pretty much meaningless) and replace "pixel" with "photosite" and you've pretty much got what I've described. You still don't get it. First of all, the "0" step was only used to identify the surrounding 4 pixels (sensels). Traversing from any pixel to the next requires stepping the distance from one pixel to another, which is *not* 1/2 the distance/size of a pixel. If it'll help, place four hamburgers on a plate. How far is it from the center of one hamburger to either of its adjacent neighbors (not the diagonally opposite burger). If you say it's 1/2 of a hamburger's diameter, you've bitten off more than you can chew. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 15:28:12 -0500, ASAAR wrote:
On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 18:24:05 GMT, John A. wrote: On a Bayer-filtered sensor 1/2 pixel = 1 photosite. In your sequence remove step "0" (which is pretty much meaningless) and replace "pixel" with "photosite" and you've pretty much got what I've described. You still don't get it. First of all, the "0" step was only used to identify the surrounding 4 pixels (sensels). Traversing from any pixel to the next requires stepping the distance from one pixel to another, which is *not* 1/2 the distance/size of a pixel. If it'll help, place four hamburgers on a plate. How far is it from the center of one hamburger to either of its adjacent neighbors (not the diagonally opposite burger). If you say it's 1/2 of a hamburger's diameter, you've bitten off more than you can chew. I get it. You don't. If a sensor is going to be moving like this its initial position will already be where your step "0" is intended to put it, so that step is not necessary. We can safely assume the sensor will be designed to start out exactly where it needs to be for its first exposure. It's just good engineering. Otherwise it's just added motion that only serves to wear the mechanism. Seriously, why would it have a "home" position somewhere other than where it needs to be for one of the four exposures? And a pixel IS made of 2x2 photosensors on a Bayer-filtered sensor array. The sensors are arranged something like this: G R B G Together, those four photosensors make up one pixel. Ahhh... But I think I see what you're talking about. That's in a single-exposure Bayer system. In the theoretical four-exposure system we are discussing we would get four three-color synthesized pixels from each 2x2 Bayer array. (Minus a row and a column for the image, I believe, assuming we'd only keep the overlapping portions of the four exposures.) That was what you meant, right? So maybe we both get it, and don't get it. =D |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Canon Telephoto Tilt-Shift TS-E EF 90mm f/2.8 Manual Focus Lens for Canon EOS Bodies | cbgjr | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | October 24th 07 01:38 AM |
Tilt-Shift Lens: Any Experiences? | Annika1980 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 44 | April 9th 06 06:59 PM |
No need for a tilt shift lens. | Scott W | Digital Photography | 48 | November 2nd 05 04:06 AM |
ARSAT 2.8/35 tilt and shift lens | clive | Digital Photography | 13 | October 25th 04 12:29 AM |
ARSAT 2.8/35 tilt and shift lens | clive | 35mm Photo Equipment | 14 | October 25th 04 12:29 AM |