Bayer with NO anti-aliasing (Kodak Pro 14n)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by K2, Nov 28, 2003.

  1. If you take a picture using film; are
    the pictures then sharp or unsharp?

    Roland Karlsson, Dec 10, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. K2

    pehache Guest

    uhhh ???

    Each time there is a complex colored pattern on an image from a 6MP
    Bayer based camera, *there are* chromatic artefacts. Their level vary
    from camera to camera, depending on the strength of the AA filter. But
    the AA filters are always too weak to remove all the artefacts, which
    come basically from the aliasing of the chromatic components. Strong
    enough AA filters to remove all the aliasing would blur too much the
    images and the resolution (even in luminance) would drop to something
    equivalent to 1.5Mpix.

    Claiming that the SD9 Foveon sensor does not suffer at all from
    aliasing is not fair, but claiming that the usual cameras with 6Mpix
    bayer sensors do not suffer at all from chromatic artefacts is not
    fair as well (besides the facts that both claims *are* false from a
    pure signal processing point of view).
    pehache, Dec 11, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Look at it, if it is empirically sharp, then it is sharp.
    George Preddy, Dec 11, 2003
  4. You should be worried, he responded to you words by accident, obviously,
    that is what he really thinks of what you said. Ouch again.
    George Preddy, Dec 11, 2003
  5. Putting L glass on a 10D is like putting $100 diamond in a $10,000 mount.
    George Preddy, Dec 11, 2003
  6. K2

    Guest Guest

    Putting Sigma glass on a Sigma camera is like putting a dog poo on a cow
    Guest, Dec 11, 2003
  7. K2

    Guest Guest

    Guest, Dec 11, 2003
  8. K2

    Mark M Guest

    Wrong again.
    I was talking about YOUR images.
    Mark M, Dec 11, 2003
  9. No, you said only an idiot would think crop factor is not optical zoom.
    George Preddy, Dec 11, 2003
  10. George Preddy, Dec 11, 2003
  11. Sweaty Betty, clean up your act...
    George Preddy, Dec 11, 2003
  12. For some reason you say that it is an absolute truth that
    Foveon images are sharp and that Bayer images are not.

    So ... I assume that the same kind of absolute truth
    must exist for photos taken on film. Do you know which?

    Roland Karlsson, Dec 11, 2003
  13. Not me - but I may not be a part of the wolrd.

    Roland Karlsson, Dec 11, 2003
  14. K2

    JPS Guest

    In message <br9bhc$iol$>,

    1) You don't buy an 'L' lens just because of the optics. They are
    sealed better from moisture and dust; they manually focus smoothly
    without play.

    2) Every lens varies in sharpness at different apertures, and different
    focal lengths if it is a zoom. L lenses tend to have a larger
    percentage of their range sharp enough for the sensor.

    3) Many L lenses can resolve far more than than current DSLR sensor can,
    but their higher sharpness means more contrast in the highest
    frequencies recorded, and less artifacts should you decide to boost the
    high-frequency contrast for final output.

    4) Many L lenses have almost 0 chromatic abberation. My 300mm f4L, for
    example, has so little aberration that no focusing compensation is
    necessary for IR.
    JPS, Dec 11, 2003
  15. K2

    JPS Guest

    In message <bra7tc$7l8$>,
    Ooh, whoopdy do! Opinions that you would never respect unless they
    agreed with you can parrot press releases made by dishonest companies!
    WHat will they think of next?
    JPS, Dec 11, 2003
  16. K2

    JPS Guest

    In message <br9aoi$ifq$>,
    Sharp with *what*? Sharp with illegitimate sampling artifacts, or sharp
    with real image detail, consistent up to a certain frequency?

    You can downsize any DSLR image to a 60*40 pixel image with nearest
    neighbor, and it will be very sharp. Sharp with *what*?
    JPS, Dec 11, 2003
  17. K2

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    And how often does *that* happen, outside of benchmarks? All I see in
    most 10D bayer images, when zoomed in, is a limitation in detail. I
    don't see surprise colors, I don't see false textures, I just see an
    image wisely to filtered to what most scenes need.
    The bayer artifacts from DSLRs are not noticeable in real scenes. The
    SD9 artifacts are glaring in *any* instance where a sharp lens is used,
    and is in sharp focus.
    JPS, Dec 11, 2003
  18. No I didn't, I said look and it and decide if it is sharp. Yes, Roland, you
    are capable of deciding when a picture is sharp, you don't need a commercial
    entity to tell you what you see.
    George Preddy, Dec 12, 2003
  19. That would be a sharp, 2400P non-interplated image. The "non-interpolated"
    part is really only an approximation of geniune Foveon quality, as it is
    accomplished by averaging previous interpolations. IOWs, averaging 4
    guesses that were based on 25% real data. While this doesn't really get to
    a probability of 1, and is therefore is obviously never as good as simply
    knowing the proper color through direct image sensing, it is a reasonable
    standard for the purposes of this discussion.

    Most want at least 1 sharp, non-interpolated MP for mid-range amatuer work
    (not to be confused with 4MP-interpolated, which is the default Bayer output
    for 1MP non-interpolated). Even the soft, sensor-poor Canon 10D can output
    a 1.58MP non-interpolated image with decent sharpness, roughly comparable to
    a non-interpolated 3.43MP Foveon image. 3.5MP non-interpolated
    (14MP-interpolated) is about the cutoff for absolute bare minimum pro level
    results with Bayer (using 35mm color film equivalent as the "pro" standard,
    that is using color, not B&W targets) . Foveon does exceed that standard
    substantially with only 3.43MP non-interpolated, but that is due to a major
    reduction in artifacts compared to all-over-the-map Bayers, and consistent
    performance through all color channels.
    George Preddy, Dec 12, 2003
  20. K2

    Guest Guest

    Allow me to provide a shoretned explanation.

    "I am George. I can talk bollocks. Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah sharp blah blah
    blah orhpaned blah blah blah 10.4 blah blah 1.58 blah blah. By the way, I am
    colourblind and have limited cognitive function".
    Guest, Dec 12, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.