[Fenwoodian]

.
Dr Russell A. Kirsch invented the square pixel in 1957.

Vimeo

In the above video he explains how "variable shaped pixels" are so much better than his original "square pixels".

Might variable shaped pixels be the next major revolutionary breakthrough in sensor technology?

[Not a Number]

Seems odd, since the 50's was the widescreen cinema era: Cinerama, CinemaScope, VistaVision, SuperScope, Todd-AO, Techinirama, Ultra Panavision and Super Panavision 70.

Many of these were anamorphic processes so in a sense did not use square pixels.

[stevebrot]

Non-square pixels have been used for displays for some time, a good example might be the Trinitron monitors I owned back in the day (1990s).


Steve

[stevebrot]

Might variable shaped pixels be the next major revolutionary breakthrough in sensor technology?

Sensors don't have pixels, though there is some variation in Bayer array layout.


Steve

[Fenwoodian]

To those who don't believe the pixels in our photos are square, just magnify any image in Photoshop to the maximum and you'll see nothing but a bunch of squares.

[stevebrot]

To those who don't believe the pixels in our photos are square, just magnify any image in Photoshop to the maximum and you'll see nothing but a bunch of squares.

I just asked the electrons and they assured me that they are where they are and referred me to some guy named Heisenberg. Programmatically, pixels don't have shape, just RGB values. Magnifying an image 11:1 in Lightroom shows me a bunch of squares, but that is how Adobe prefers to deal with them. Putting a magnifying loupe against my monitor screen shows three vertical rectangular phosphors per display pixel. I can't tell for sure. but the combined widths appear to be mildly wider than high.




Steve

[swanlefitte]

To those who don't believe the pixels in our photos are square, just magnify any image in Photoshop to the maximum and you'll see nothing but a bunch of squares.

Even if they were 'L' shaped, they could only be rendered in the square pixels of the monitor or dots of the printer. Think of the artifacts that would create!

[Paul the Sunman]

I just asked the electrons and they assured me that they are where they are and referred me to some guy named Heisenberg.

Yes, but WHEN were they there? (Nerdy quantum mechanics joke )

[Bob 256]

Pixels and an image proportion are totally "apples and oranges" and pixel shape has nothing to do with the aspect ratio of an image. That said, pixels are just a means of breaking an image into smaller portions which can be coded as data. Television has used rectangular (not square) pixels since the inception of digital television to the consternation of pixel counters who couldn't figure out why the horizontal and vertical pixel counts were not representative of the image aspect ratio but again why should they unless one assumes square pixels are the norm. Usually, rectangular pixels (not square) are used as a means to reduce bandwidth (which was one reason they were used for television - 720x450 yielded a 16:9 image). Variable sized pixels are irrelevant if small enough pixels sizes are used and coding methods lump similar pixels together (somewhat like jpeg does - you can create "variable sized" samples from smaller groups of pixels). It all goes back to sampling theory which requires a certain number of pixels in the horizontal and vertical directions to achieve a given resolution in each direction - doesn't matter what shape they are but rectangular work best since they fit closely together (hexagonal pixels would work but are impractical as are a number of other shapes).

Just a side note; when you take a close look at a CRT like a Trinitron, the color stripes or rectangular color blocks don't relate to pixels in the image. They are determined by the construction parameters of the display device (its "aperture grille"), and pixels map wherever they happen to fall on that canvas. They in fact have to overlap several color blocks in order for color variations in individual pixels to be rendered (digital LCD monitors are another story for another day but again you don't necessarily have pixel/color block correspondence).

[AstroDave]

Yes, but WHEN were they there? (Nerdy quantum mechanics joke )

And, add some more nerdiness - how FAST were they going?! (more technically correct, what is their momentum?)

[K-Three]

how FAST were they going

Can't know both at the same time!

[StiffLegged]

Seems odd, since the 50's was the widescreen cinema era: Cinerama, CinemaScope, VistaVision, SuperScope, Todd-AO, Techinirama, Ultra Panavision and Super Panavision 70.

Many of these were anamorphic processes so in a sense did not use square pixels.

First time I ever heard that film used pixels...

[leekil]

Television has used rectangular (not square) pixels since the inception of digital television

And computers before that, that used televisions or composite monitors, also had rectangular pixels.

[AstroDave]

Originally posted by AstroDave Quote
how FAST were they going
Can't know both at the same time!

That's Paul's and my point/joke - the uncertainty principle.

[stevebrot]

That's Paul's and my point/joke - the uncertainty principle.

Hey! My joke first!


Steve