Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 5, Issue 340
Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 5, Issue 340
- Subject: Re: Colorsync-users Digest, Vol 5, Issue 340
- From: "edmund ronald" <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 11:35:40 +0200
Th light entering the spectro is being divided up into many small
buckets which need to be read by real-world electronics. Some of these
buckets will get really few photons, but each bucket has read noise
issues. Example, if your read noise per bucket is (Xr, then reading a
sigle signal of 10Xr is quite meaningful, but reading that signal
split across 10 buckets is pretty meaningless. Thus to read across
many small buckets you need better more expensive amps with less noise
than for a big bucket, and at some point these amps and sensors don't
exist anymore., The same problem hits digital cameras, and is the
main reason why the race to more pixels is not a good idea, and a
strong contributor to the fact pixel size has a lower limit at each
point in time.
Edmund
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Graeme Gill <email@hidden> wrote:
> Sorry, I still don't see the logic of this argument, unless one introduces
> quantum and/or quantization error effects (you'd need some
> maths to convince me), and my point was that any such effect is likely to
> be much less than the the major difference, which is the difference in
> area (hence amount of light) being sampled, and as such, it's misleading
> suggest the first as the primary issue.
>
> Graeme Gill.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden