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]

[filmscanners] Re: film and scanning vs digital photography



Seems to me the camera should be able to compensate for the vignetting.
It "knows" the lens and the sensor, so it should know the light falloff.

I'm not sure about the thickness of the silicon (technically the vapox
over the sensor) being the source of the light falloff at the edges, but
the effect is documented.

Tony Sleep wrote:
> On 05/07/2007 David J. Littleboy wrote:
>> I don't buy it.
>
> AIUI the colour fringing is a combination of chromatic aberration in the
> lens and Bayer colour interpolation.
>
> Vignetting is due to the microlenses presenting a smaller effective
> aperture to off-axis rays.
>
> You get both together, but they're distinctly different in their origins.
>
> --
> Regards
>
> Tony Sleep
> http://tonysleep.co.uk
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.