[filmscanners] Re: Newish Digital Tech

["David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com>]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This is all interesting, and probably quite accurate, but it isn't what
my eyes tell me.  I've downloaded several full size captures taken from
the Foveon chip (via the Sigma camera) and I find the images from the X3
superior to similar images on a Canon product using a CCD and Bayer.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Yes, they _appear_ to look better, but you don't know what is real data and
what is artifacting. You get a twig pattern where the D60 only showed fuzz,
but the twig pattern won't be the actual twig pattern in the scene. The
artifacts look just as good as real data. I just don't think a system with
that level of artifacts is going to be acceptable. With similar pixel counts
and an anti-aliasing filter, I suspect the Foveon sensor might be slightly
better, but then the question of color rendering will arise. Is the Foveon
trick really good enough to separate out the colors as well as the on-chip
color filters?

>>>>>>>>
 From a practical standpoint, what I noticed is that most of the
inherent problems I have observed with CCD based digital camera
captures, have been eliminated with the X3.
<<<<<<<<<

What problems bother you? It looks to me that Bayer images are better than
scanned images on a per-pixel basis. Even the sharpest Provia 4000dpi scans
printed at 300 dpi are a lot softer than D60 images printed at 240dpi. It
seems to me that the main problems with Bayer cameras are sensor size and
pixel counts. A 9MP full-frame US$2,000 camera would put 35mm film out of
business for all practical purposes. I'll retire my 645, pick up a GSW690
for landscapes, and do everything else with the 9MP dSLR...

>>>>>>>>
  The images I looked at were
not from a Foveon site where one might expect some bias to slant the
image content toward that chip's best case scenario, but in reviews and
commentary of the Sigma camera.
<<<<<<<<<

They look nice and sharp, but there are color rendition and blown highlight
problems with the SD9. This isn't fair to the X3, since the SD9 is such a
dog.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Perhaps, each technology will end up having its niche market, or perhaps
something will eclipse both, but if I had the choice, right now, I'd be
much more tempted toward the Foveon technology for digital images
capture.  Further, the X3 is literally the first consumer generation
of that chips technology while CCD has had many years to mature.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<

The bit about it being the first generation is its largest problem. The SD9
is a really badly implemented digital camera: compared to how well the Sony
F717 is done, and how well the Canon and Nikon dSLRs are done, it's a
pitiful joke.

>>>>>>>>>>
  Unless
there is a known limitation within the technology of the X3 chip
technology, I'd expect evolutionary improvements as has occurred with
the CCD chips.
<<<<<<<<<<<

My reaction to the hype has been excessively negative, but until they come
up with a decently implemented camera with an anti-aliasing filter, I'm not
hopping on the bandwagon.

>>>>>>>>>>>>
To me, the fact that the X3 chip leapfrogs so many of the original
problems in the early CCD technology, gives it great promise.  It should
also lead to cheaper cameras since less is required in terms of
calculating electronics within the camera, since the raw image is pretty
much a finished product.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<

But calculating electronics are cheap and getting cheaper, fast and getting
faster. I hate to accues you, of all people, of technophobia, but it looks
to me that much of the unhappiness with Bayer cameras and the frantic
jumping on the X3 bandwagon is a sort of technophobia due to a lack of
understanding of the algorithms involved and a lack of understanding of the
point that digital imaging is limited to resolutions well under the Nyquist
limit due to aliasing. Digital images _have_ to be soft when observed at the
pixel level.

David J. Littleboy
davidjl@gol.com
Tokyo, Japan

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