Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-20-2009, 05:41 PM   #16
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,312
QuoteOriginally posted by tr13 Quote
Are you an idiot?
Why do you need same DOF and huge picture to look at color?
EV are pretty similar, color histograms are almost the same.

I am pretty surprised that most photographers here do not know about color spaces and color rendering in digital SLRs.
I think you owe "eigelb" an apology. He is only expressing an observation. Calling him an idiot is inflammatory, arrogant and totally unacceptable as well as offensive behavior for this blog! I suspect you will be doing so shortly. I'm sure he will graciously accept your humble apology...


Last edited by benjikan; 11-20-2009 at 05:49 PM.
11-20-2009, 06:34 PM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,767
Poor tr13.

He tried to make a simple point - reds seem to render with some issues on Pentax CMOS sensor cameras.

Alas while that may be a valid observation, to demonstrate that in a way people won't argue about needs an awful lot of rigorous laboratory-grade test images and data. So people shouldn't be too hard on him if he doesn't have access to a lab to demonstrate his point. Who does?
11-20-2009, 08:53 PM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,511
Difference is night and day on my calibrated studio monitor.
11-20-2009, 09:57 PM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 343
Original Poster
Guys it is fun to read all that.
I am sorry for idiot thing, but I am rather bored by all this "right guys" who shoot brick walls in RAW on their DSLRs and talking about things that they do not understand.
Next time I'll be using "mentally challenged" term :-)
And I really want to suggest to read my posts carefully.
My only point that for digital sensors it is hard to render some colors right and even cheap CCD could be better here.


Last edited by tr13; 11-20-2009 at 10:13 PM.
11-20-2009, 10:00 PM   #20
Veteran Member
Raybo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 871
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
I think you owe "eigelb" an apology. He is only expressing an observation. Calling him an idiot is inflammatory, arrogant and totally unacceptable as well as offensive behavior for this blog! I suspect you will be doing so shortly. I'm sure he will graciously accept your humble apology...
It just might be a language thing.
An apology might be in order but don't be to harsh.
11-20-2009, 10:41 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 343
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by amoringello Quote
he has quite the lack of understanding of how to look at a subject and break it down logically to properly determine how to go about an investigation. This sort of critical thinking should be trivial for someone who is comfortable with reverse engineering firmware or handling such a project.

As I've said, his comments are argumentative for the sake of argument. I would not put a lot of trust in the work coming from such a person. I've been doing software development and quality assurance for the better part of 30 years and I've seen companies fall apart when its leaders have that sort of attitude. I would wish to neither work with nor for such a person.
This is the most funny I ever read :-)
Looks like words from graduate course student who just finished reading some smart literature about software development. This is so simple, he thinks, just make a plan, use this waterfall thing and all'll go just fine. And if someone thinks that in reality it works quite different and sometines don't work at all, he must be stupid :-)
11-21-2009, 04:30 AM   #22
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
The thread seems to came out a little bad, but i believe the topic is interesting enough, to be worth continuing in a polite and qualitative manner.

Correct me if i'm wrong (and since tr13 being well educated in physics may know this a lot better than me), but as far as i know the main factor determining the colour response characteristics of a sensor itself is the photo active material (if you could say so), which in both - CMOS and CCD sensors currently is Si (and maybe have some additional materials untold by manufacturers).
The spectral response of the Si is following:


You can clearly see that it has the best response from red to near infra-red, but is very poor at blues. This could hint that the cause of bad red's could be dynamic range, which cannot cope with the big differences in each colour component well.

Other sensor related factor of colour reproduction could be its geometry - either there are any nano-scale shapes or other materials interacting with specific wavelengths - currently CMOS sensors have a lot more of "junk" in front of the photo diode, but lately Sony has brought backside illuminated sensors to the consumer market, where all this junk is moved behind the photo diodes, leaving it with even "cleaner view" than CCD sensors.
Improving blue colour response aswell:



Now most of the other factors affecting colour performance are sensor independent, like colour filters used, IR filter, ADC and its colour configuration, lens colour characteristics and RAW processing (sorry for bad jpeg's).
Images for some additional thinking:
CMOS:


CCD:

Last edited by ytterbium; 11-21-2009 at 04:38 AM.
11-21-2009, 09:10 AM   #23
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,109
QuoteOriginally posted by tr13 Quote
This is the most funny I ever read :-)
Looks like words from graduate course student who just finished reading some smart literature about software development. This is so simple, he thinks, just make a plan, use this waterfall thing and all'll go just fine. And if someone thinks that in reality it works quite different and sometines don't work at all, he must be stupid :-)
What is really funny is that you think you've gained any meaningful data by making a comparison where every single parameter of the test is changed from one sample to the other and that you are gleaning meaningful information.
The difference you've noted could just as easily be caused by software rendering as a difference in colour response between the two sensor types.

11-21-2009, 09:40 AM   #24
Pentaxian
amoringello's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Virginia, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,425
QuoteOriginally posted by tr13 Quote
This is the most funny I ever read :-)
Looks like words from graduate course student who just finished reading some smart literature about software development. This is so simple, he thinks, just make a plan, use this waterfall thing and all'll go just fine. And if someone thinks that in reality it works quite different and sometines don't work at all, he must be stupid :-)
Troll
Yawn :ugh:
11-21-2009, 09:54 AM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 343
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
What is really funny is that you think you've gained any meaningful data by making a comparison where every single parameter of the test is changed from one sample to the other and that you are gleaning meaningful information.
The difference you've noted could just as easily be caused by software rendering as a difference in colour response between the two sensor types.
And RAW comparison using same lens will be the same?
You must know that actual RAW is quite heavy processed even after ADC.
So, you'll have different ADCs, different RAW processing and different algorithms in RAW converter (yes, they are different and even similar parts have different parameters).
Do you propose me to analize direct readout of sensors and adc performance?
11-21-2009, 10:16 AM   #26
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,109
QuoteOriginally posted by tr13 Quote
And RAW comparison using same lens will be the same?
You must know that actual RAW is quite heavy processed even after ADC.
So, you'll have different ADCs, different RAW processing and different algorithms in RAW converter (yes, they are different and even similar parts have different parameters).
Do you propose me to analize direct readout of sensors and adc performance?
At least if you use the same lens and same software rendering you have eliminated two of the variables that you've left in, but yes, if you really want to be able to meaningfully say that a CMOS renders reds differently from a CCD, then you have to go straight back to the sensor output.
Camera raw files are as close as the average person is going to get to being able to do this.
11-21-2009, 10:38 AM   #27
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
So i believe that the actual discussion would be GX's colour output versus Panasonic's one, if put in the way tr13 wanted to compare things - that is the actual results one is getting.

Or am i wrong and you're still trying to prove who's true?
11-21-2009, 11:00 AM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 343
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
At least if you use the same lens and same software rendering you have eliminated two of the variables that you've left in, but yes, if you really want to be able to meaningfully say that a CMOS renders reds differently from a CCD, then you have to go straight back to the sensor output.
Camera raw files are as close as the average person is going to get to being able to do this.
I really suspected something like this. Unfortunately RAW data can be much more distant from adc readout then JPEG from RAW renderer result. And you only eliminare ONE variable - lens.
And as for direct ADC data, I believe that I can povide them for both K20D and K10D and if some brilliant developers(slash trolls) with 30 year expireance could do analizing software this could be quite useful.

Here is old quote quite similar to my post:
"Suppose you can take photos with close color details of your favorite flower in one shot and without the hassle of post processing to get to the right color details. I have experienced a hard time developing a correct color of my favorite garden flower with Canon’s 30D DSLR, while Sony’s color details are much closer to the real colors that you see while shooting the scene."
11-21-2009, 01:32 PM   #29
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
So.. still cant stop arguing .. i guess this thread is long dead, respective to its original topic and should be closed then :P.

Otherwise, if anyone is still willing to discuss, my question to the tr13 is - what did you wanted to tell - that CCD's are better at colour reproduction, or that the colour output of GX20 is inaccurate?

If this is the case, then i think all Pentax cameras and their Bright tone have very inaccurate color output, with cameras Fuji being the leader at muted, realistic colour representation.
If accurate colours are needed i always have to use RAW processing even with my k200d having CCD. Even more, i need to use tool other than PPL, because it's colour processing is very similar to in camera.

Still photography as whole is very subjective representation of reality and i always try to keep that in mind.
11-21-2009, 09:11 PM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,511
Its interesting that CMOS sensors have been made the wrong way till the Sony exmor in the KX


Interestingly our eyes are also built the wrong way, with the 'wires' being in front of the 'sensors'. Some nocturnal animals don't have this problem of course.

Other animals have a reflective layer behind that again so they get the light bouncing back through their sensors twice (cats) this might be the next step in getting more light on our cameras!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, ccd, cmos, dslr, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CMOS vs. CCD and sensor blooming DonDouglas Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 07-30-2010 07:29 AM
K10D CCD vs. CMOS K 20D kleinstein Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 05-18-2010 12:34 AM
Macro Rendering Barnster Post Your Photos! 1 12-31-2009 07:41 AM
Is the new Cmos sensor as sensitive as CCD? ChrisJ Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 06-29-2009 11:45 PM
CCD Vs CMOS MikePerham Pentax DSLR Discussion 20 08-13-2008 05:39 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:47 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top