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: Density vs Dynamic range



Ei, Robert...good man!

> Here is a link to the standard proposal:
>
> http://www.pima.net/standards/iso/tc42/wg18/ISO_21550/N4909_WD21550_v3.PDF
>
> Since it is just a proposal comments can be submitted to:
>
> http://www.pima.net/standards/iso/tc42/wg18/ISO_21550/WD21550_Comm
> ent_Form.d
> oc
>
> I would appreciate your input on that.

I'm concluding they are saying the EXACT same thing...  Simply put, they
have dMin as the noise floor, and dMax as the clipping point...all correct,
and remember, it's in log values (they specifically say density
value...which is a log scale).  Subtraction in logs is the same as division
in "regular"...

ISO equation -> dMax - dMin:

So, for a dMax of 3.6, and a dMin of .2 -> 3.6 - .2 = 3.4


the Dynamic Range equation out of "Digital Signal Processing in VLSI":

DR (dB) = 10log10(largest signal/smallest discernable signal) or:

3.6 is equal to 10**3.6 or 3981, and .2 is 10**.2 or 1.5849...

SO...

DR (in Bells, not DECI-Bells) = log10(3981/1.5849)

Which, is 3.4 ;-)

So, it appears they are saying the exact same thing.  Any comments?

Regards,

Austin

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



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.