«

(BTW, I'm new to this subject, so forgive me if I use some terminology
incorrectly)
I recall a few years ago reading a short article in a magazine--can't
remember which one, maybe Popular Science--about someone designing a
new digital camera CCD, in which half of the pixels were larger in size
than the other half. IIRC it was an attempt to simulate/emulate film
grain.

Does this ring a bell with anyone? Does anyone know where I might
learn more about this, or if it was an idea that just fell by the
wayside?

Thanks in advance for any help.

--
James

<> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
> (BTW, I'm new to this subject, so forgive me if I use some terminology
> incorrectly)
> I recall a few years ago reading a short article in a magazine--can't
> remember which one, maybe Popular Science--about someone designing a
> new digital camera CCD, in which half of the pixels were larger in size
> than the other half. IIRC it was an attempt to simulate/emulate film
> grain.
>
> Does this ring a bell with anyone? Does anyone know where I might
> learn more about this, or if it was an idea that just fell by the
> wayside?
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.
>
> --
> James
>
That may be the Fuji S3, it has 6 million "standard" size pixels and 6
million smaller one, but it isn't to emulate the grain of film, it is an
attempt to get better dynamic range...if I both understand and remember
correctly.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

Had this anything to do with Faveon?
If so, it took the way of never never land...
Marcel

<> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
> (BTW, I'm new to this subject, so forgive me if I use some terminology
> incorrectly)
> I recall a few years ago reading a short article in a magazine--can't
> remember which one, maybe Popular Science--about someone designing a
> new digital camera CCD, in which half of the pixels were larger in size
> than the other half. IIRC it was an attempt to simulate/emulate film
> grain.
>
> Does this ring a bell with anyone? Does anyone know where I might
> learn more about this, or if it was an idea that just fell by the
> wayside?
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.
>
> --
> James
>

On 4 Oct 2005 13:50:28 -0700, wrote:

>(BTW, I'm new to this subject, so forgive me if I use some terminology
>incorrectly)
>I recall a few years ago reading a short article in a magazine--can't
>remember which one, maybe Popular Science--about someone designing a
>new digital camera CCD, in which half of the pixels were larger in size
>than the other half. IIRC it was an attempt to simulate/emulate film
>grain.
>
>Does this ring a bell with anyone? Does anyone know where I might
>learn more about this, or if it was an idea that just fell by the
>wayside?
>
>Thanks in advance for any help.

Otherwise know as the Fuji Super CCD in the S3. The goal was not to
emulate film grain, but to extend dyanmic range, which it has done.

-Rich

Rich <> wrote:
>> I recall a few years ago reading a short article in a magazine--can't
>> remember which one, maybe Popular Science--about someone designing a
>> new digital camera CCD, in which half of the pixels were larger in size
>> than the other half. IIRC it was an attempt to simulate/emulate film grain.
>
> Otherwise know as the Fuji Super CCD in the S3. The goal was not to
> emulate film grain, but to extend dyanmic range, which it has done.

Even the Fuji Super CCD HR (in many of their lower-range cameras) has
non-rectangular pixel sensors, though only the CCD SR has smaller ones
specifically for greater dynamic range.

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos..._Pixels_01.htm