If your eyes were pixel arrays....

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by K2, Nov 21, 2003.

  1. K2

    K2 Guest

    ....Would you want them to anti-alias the incoming light to compensate
    for crippled cones and rods that could only capture one primary color
    at a time, or would you want every millimeter of your retina to
    capture full color and apply no filter to reality?

    I'll take "Foveon" eyes myself because that's how real eyes work.

    BTW, the word Foveon was derived from "fovea centralis," the sharpest
    central part of the retina. I think it's well named.

    K2, Nov 21, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. K2

    Tom Thackrey Guest

    The problem with your analysis is that each cone only senses one color!
    (Sound familiar?)

    Note that your brain does a huge amount of interpolation on the image from
    the retina.

    Not only do the rods (which outnumber the cones by 20:1) not sense color,
    but there's a gap in the retina where the optic nerve connects that is
    filled in by the brain.

    Tom Thackrey, Nov 21, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. K2

    K2 Guest

    I stand corrected to some degree. But, according to
    (www.starizona.com/ccd/advtheorycolor.htm cones don't capture just one
    primary color, rather a range, and they don't need anti-aliasing in
    the sense that Bayer cameras do.

    But then again, the Foveon concept seems to be doing the eye one

    K2, Nov 21, 2003
  4. K2

    Tom Thackrey Guest

    The keyword here is concept. Sadly, the current implementation doesn't
    Tom Thackrey, Nov 21, 2003
  5. K2

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Not really. The information provided to the brain by your eyes is a
    combination of black and white (rods) and color information (cones), and
    the brain does a conversion and combination operation very similar to
    the Bayer process in digital cameras. Of course the brain has the
    advantage of massive parallel processing and continuous incoming data.
    Ron Hunter, Nov 21, 2003
  6. Just wondering. What is the reason you start this thread?
    No they don't. Human eyes show a similarity to a random Bayer CFA
    arrangement for color vision, and they filter the high frequencies. Try
    seeing any detail beyond the limiting resolution, and you see a gray blur
    instead of false detail.

    Bart van der Wolf, Nov 21, 2003
  7. No they don't.
    Charlie Dilks, Nov 21, 2003
  8. Preddy-troll-o-meter

    1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10
    < >

    Seen the Smegma jokes George....some are very good.....
    Betty Swallocks, Nov 21, 2003
  9. K2

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    That's a start.
    They're not laid out in a grid, and they have an organic DSP with
    millions of years of evolutionary support.
    JPS, Nov 21, 2003
  10. K2

    eawckyegcy Guest

    Your eyes do not need "anti-alias" filters because the "sensor array"
    is not a uniform grid. The critical assumption behind the sampling
    theorem is ... hm.

    Better not. George Preddy, K2, Wehner, or whatever he wants to call
    himself once again proves he is negatively intelligent: give him a
    concept and he will _invariably_ misunderstand it, and the more one
    tries to teach him, he just gets more and more stupid.

    And at this point, it is clear we are dealing with an interstellar
    scale void of intelligence. It is probably at the same point in
    development as the early universe was during inflation: exponentially
    increasing insipidness. He is so hugely stupid that I am left no
    choice but to quote the amazing Uncle Al:

    I cannot believe how incredibly stupid GP/K2/CDW/etc is. I mean
    rock-hard stupid. Blazing hot mid-day sun on Mercury stupid. Surface
    of Venus under 80 atmospheres of red-hot carbon dioxide and sulfuric
    acid vapor dehydrated for 300 million years rock-hard stupid. Stupid
    so stupid that it goes way beyond the stupid we know into a whole
    different sensorium of stupid. GP/K2/CDW/etc is trans-stupid stupid.
    Meta-stupid. Stupid so collapsed upon itself that it is within its
    own Schwarzschild radius. Black hole stupid. Stupid gotten so dense
    and massive that no intellect can escape. Singularity stupid.
    GP/K2/CDW/etc emits more stupid/second than our entire galaxy
    otherwise emits stupid/year. Quasar stupid. Nothing else in the
    universe can be this stupid. GP/K2/CDW/etc is an oozingly putrescent
    primordial fragment from the original Big Bang of Stupid, a pure
    essence of stupid so uncontaminated by anything else as to be beyond
    the laws of physics that define maximally extrapolated hypergeometric
    n-dimensional backgroundless stupid as we can imagine it.
    GP/K2/CDW/etc is Planck stupid, a quantum foam of stupid, a vacuum
    decay of stupid, a grand unified theory of stupid.
    eawckyegcy, Nov 21, 2003
  11. K2

    Don Stauffer Guest

    The eye does not need anti-aliasing. Aliasing only occurs with REGULAR
    sampling intervals. The placement of rods and cones in the eye are not
    regularly spaced, they are randomly spaced. If we had random pixel
    spacing in electronic cameras we wouldn't have much aliasing either.
    Some early electronic cameras (vidicons and image dissector cameras) DID
    have random sampling capability. However, attempts to do this so far in
    CCD chips has not worked out.

    Now, by random on a CCD, I do not mean the order or time sequence. I
    mean that the array is not a regular grid with identical pixel size and
    spacing, but random positioning of center of pixels.
    Don Stauffer, Nov 22, 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.