• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Color of a rose...
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Color of a rose...


  • Subject: Re: Color of a rose...
  • From: José Ángel Bueno García <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:39:48 +0200

2009/6/4 Graeme Gill <email@hidden>:
> Sean wrote:
>>
>> Would you be kind enough to describe to me your impressions of how reds
>> and yellows
>> differ between bayer and foveon arrays?  Avoiding demosaicing sounds
>> appealing as I
>> would think that it would pull a layer of prefix interpretation out of the
>> workflow.
>> In any case the analogy to film would end there no?  Digital will never be
>> anything but
>> natively linear.
>
> The Bayer interpolation drawbacks are primarily about spatial aspects,
> particularly moire and sampling artefacts, and has nothing
> directly to do with spectral sensitivity or linearity.

Of course, and both, Foveon and Bayer are constructed with photoreceptors

> The other differences to Foveon are the spectral
> sensitivities, and it's more likely here that the Bayer will have
> the advantage since the Foveon is at the mercy of whatever
> the spectral filtering the silicon has, whereas a Bayer filter
> can be selected to have specifically chosen filter characteristics.

It´s suposed that technicians at Foveon have enough background to do
what they want to sell, but don´t own Sigma and can´t measure its
behavioure, but I read technical information and user opinions.


> I'm sure the foveon can be tweaked a bit with extra filters
> in front of the silicon, but it can't change the overlap
> between bands, and will be at the cost of sensitivity.

You mean the same way we loose light in analog photography when using
filters?. Then yes, of course.
>
> As for linearity, well if you avoid saturating the digital sensor,
> you can then introduce whatever non-linearity you desire if
> your aim is to emulate the non-linear characteristics of film.

 Are you telling that underexposed images are more saturated? . Then yes again.

I only use polarized filter ocassionally under direct sun light to
avoid reflections from water, ocassionally under flash light to shot
nudes and ocassionally in panoramic of art gallery with glass or
plastic material in furniture or as part of the art, never with the
artifact.

My experience on using the considerations from ICC on how creating
scene-refered is that works fine but have to undersaturate about
10-15% some of the times, and if I want to reproduce reds, yellows and
oranges from nature, is better not to do under direct sunlight and use
a difusser or neutral (?) umbrella.
>
> Graeme Gill.

And I am waiting for Argyll GUI. Please.

Thank you

Salud

Jose Bueno
 _______________________________________________
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

References: 
 >Re: Color of a rose... (From: Sean <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Color of a rose... (From: Graeme Gill <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Color of a rose...
  • Next by Date: Re: Color of a rose...
  • Previous by thread: Re: Color of a rose...
  • Next by thread: Re: Color of a rose...
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread