Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 




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

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

[filmscanners] RE: Foveon


> using
> color filtration/separation caused by the natural characteristics of
> silicon,

Where did you read that it is "natural"?

> it records much more color information for the same number of
> pixels,

That depends on what one "means" by pixel.  It records the EXACT same amount
of information per number of sensors, period.  Foveon is just "correct" in
how they differentiate pixels from sensors.  In a Bayer patterned CCD, every
sensor is NOT a pixel by definition, though their marketing tries to claim
so.  Now, if you took four sensors in the Bayer patterned CCD and CALLED
them a pixel, that would be more "correct" in the use of terminology, and be
almost exactly what the "concept" of the Foveon chip does.

> and reduces the problem with artifacts, moir, and false color.

Those are issues that have been dealt with long ago, and not an issue today
with Bayer patterned sensors.

> It also eliminates a lot of the need for fast processors to calculate
> the bayer pattern algorithms within the camera, which should reduce
> costs tremendously over time.

You keep saying that, but it's not true.  There is no fast processor, it is
dedicated hardware, and costs pennies.  It is also done in real time, and
causes only latency, not a decrease in throughput.


Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.