ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/commercial photography



> And while it does not address my point at all there
> are more then the two 'dimensions' you mentioned, i.e. time, etc.

It certainly does address your point, you may not understand why though.
There are not any other dimensions than I stated (positional and value) to
the data you get from a digital camera.

> > Interpolation requires the addition of new data points, like when a
> > scanner
> > that has an optical resolution of 1200 DPI gives you 2400 DPI.
>
> Interpolation does not require new data points, it can produces them.

Of course interpolation produces them how is that different than "the
addition of new data points"?  The definition of interpolation REQUIRES that
additional data points be "produced" or, more accurately, "created".

> >  That
> > is
> > interpolation of positional data.  Interpolation means to "insert"
> > between
> > other elements.
>
> Exactly, you insert the blue, green, and red data points where they are
> missing on the 6Mpixel grid.

You are NOT inserting any new data points.  The 6M points are already there.
You are only changing their value.  Simple as that.

Interpolation is an algorithm, and as such, the derivation of color
information does not have to be done with interpolation.  Good, bad, or
indifferent.




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.