An archive thread about a Canon patent came back to mind after I read some of the speculation ( now a closed thread on DPR no less ) of an upcoming Canon announcement in Stockholm on Sep 5 and finding that this is when an international Photonics conference starts there.
That patent (#6388709) was filed in the late 90's (granted May 16 2002) and would be a blockbuster advance in image sensors if they've gotten it to work acceptably.
It describes their version of capturing RG and B individually at each sensor location (no more Bayer) and a dynamic range enhancing control system (more "film-like" - my visualization).
Briefly, imagine a regular monochromatic CMOS or CCD sensor with three layers of LCD on top, covered by a microlens array that matches the pixels. The control signal going to the LCD layers controls the color they become when activated - they're colorless otherwise. To take a picture you have to collect three images off the sensor in *rapid* succession as the RGB or CMY channels. Here the obvious technical issue is getting the chip read fast enough for a reasonable shutterspeed. Perhaps early incarnations will have limits on how fast it can do this.
The other exciting thing I read in the descriptions and claims this time which I missed last time is going to increase dynamic range if it works well. Those filters in the LCD layers can also be used as ND filters by turning on all three colors at once to some degree. Thus the filters would be 100% transmitting until some charge was collected and their transmission would go down as more was collected etc This effectively makes an inverted S curve out of luminance so shadows are captured better and highlights blown more gently. Since the shape of the S curve would be predetermined, you then extend the range back out (Dolby for pixels?) and use the extra dynamic range how you see fit! Here the sensor charge accumulator directly seems to need to control only the piece of LCD directly above it.
I'm not a photonics wiz but I think I got the general idea of it right! (and I didn't read all the details)
Perhaps a more technical press release will happen on Sep 5th and/or a demo of a prototype chip showing how far they have come and an estimate of when it will be commercialized?
Well, the subject line *did* say "speculation on rumor" and it is an interesting technology described in the patent so even if this speculation has nothing to do with the rumor, perhaps it's just time to wonder - did that technology pan out yet?
I specualte that people will write, and guess, and speculate until September 5th when they find out that there is some minor/insignificant announcement.
Then they will spend another couple of days writing about how shocked they are that they got so worked up about nothing.
dmccombs wrote:
I specualte that people will write, and guess, and speculate until September 5th when they find out that there is some minor/insignificant announcement.
Then they will spend another couple of days writing about how shocked they are that they got so worked up about nothing.
That's my guess. ;-)
Until then, I will hope that the forums truly dedicated to the art will continue to push new photos and beautiful light. I'm saddened by how in so many trades, it's all about the equipment as the end in itself.
It is possible to continue to the artistic endeavor of creating beautiful images and still be interested in how equipment can further this goal - it's not an either/or proposition!
While this thread was *triggered* by the rumor mills, I really am interested in whether Canon has made progress on their non-Bayer system and if they've created a sensor with 11 (or more?) stops of dynamic range. A sensor with 16 x3 MP (equivalent resolution to a 32MP Bayer array) and 11+ stops range would certainly help me in my artistic aspirations that are currently limited in the digital world to the point that I went back to film for my landscape work!
I can't speak for Keith, but I think he and I were trying to make similar points.
While people can of course spend their time as they wish, some would argue that reading and writing about how you can get the best images from your existing kit, is much more productive than bantering about future announcements especailly one as vague as this.
Personally, I think most of us could/should spend more time learning to use the gear we have. I recently took First Place in the New Mexico State Fair - Amature Scenics category. The image was shot with a 10D and the $69 50mm F1.8 mkII.
In the past I have read up on shooting Waterfalls, and on gear and lenses. Both were very helpful in getting this shot. Now would have reading about all the unannounced equipment rumors helped get this shot? No...
Sometimes it just seems that many people spend more time researching future equipment than learning to use their existing gear. When I look in the Wildlife, People, etc. forums here, I see lots of terrific images, so I am sure the truth is somewhere in between. Many people are using their gear very well.
But hey, we don't need to be "productive" all the time. We can banter about if we want. As long as people know that cool gear only gets you so far and that great shots can be obtained with mediocre gear, there's no harm.
dmccombs wrote:
We can banter about if we want. As long as people know that cool gear only gets you so far and that great shots can be obtained with mediocre gear, there's no harm.
Regards,
Darrell
Do you really think that people are not aware of this?
Allow me to raise the opposite point of view. This is a gear forum, and any discussion about gear, be it past, present, or future, should be welcome here. Further, it should not be assumed that just because we are interested in discussing tomorrow's technology that we are not spending enough time learning the tech of today. The many highly skilled photographers who raise such issues in these gear forums are case in point; There are so many good photogs here that love to talk tech. And, it's as you say, they are spending their time how they want.
The one thing that gets really trite is the interjection of people who think they are bringing some greater sense of perspective by restating the obvious; it's the photographer who makes the shot... err.. duh.
AJS said it best. Interest in technology and interest in art and technique are not mutually exclusive; they are complimentary. One can supplement the other. If you are not impressed with the tenor of future technology discussions, by all means, don't participate. It does not seem like you do anyway, so I need not belabor that point. But I really dislike the people who barge into an intense tech discussion thinking they are possessed of HCB's or Ansel Adam's spirit, showing us the big picture, and reminding people that it's about the photographer. Most people already know this!
If you want to talk technique, the presentation forums, are a great place. There are also a large number of threads here that are devoted to better mastery of technique, from custom functions to ETTL2. If you don't like escoteric discussions about future tech, that's fine, but leave the people who do like it to discuss.
I agree this is called the Canon SLR forum to discuss hardware. I like talking about future stuff and whats down the line. Who does not, we all see Scifi movies etc..
Well, I didn't mean to ignite anything, so apologies if I owe any. I guess I was just thinking about how this is so similar to high-end audio, which I also love. Obviously I wouldn't own a 1D2 as an amateur if I did not love gear, but at the same time, I'm glad that I don't have the "upgrade fever", otherwise I'd be broke (and probably perpetually unhappy with what I have). Maybe my point can be interpreted as raining on the tech-parade that I'm a part of, but that was not my intent. I just find the correlations across different interests to be coincidental, that's all.
In high-end audio, there's always the irony that after spending about, say $10-30k on equipment, you gain enough experience to be able to look back and say, "Gee, if I were to start again, I probably could achieve getting 95% of this sound for, oh, about $5k." I'm certainly in that boat, but that was that path it took -- many others also learn this after the fact. As a photographic amateur, certainly the 1D Mark II taught me how to take a lot of shots that were not as evident to me as before, but looking back, I think done it with a 10D (doh!). Hehehehehe. I never did say that love of equipment and art was mutually exclusive, did I?
Regardless of the topics discussed, I'm glad that there is such a, generally, supportive forum for it. That, to me, is worth a lot, no matter what we talk about. I hope that this does not become such a hypersensitive site that there is constant bickering like DPR.
AJSJones wrote:
To take a picture you have to collect three images off the sensor in *rapid* succession as the RGB or CMY channels. Here the obvious technical issue is getting the chip read fast enough for a reasonable shutterspeed. Perhaps early incarnations will have limits on how fast it can do this.
I could be way off base here. . . but imagine tracking a bird in flight and having the sensor collect three images in rapid succession. Depending on the speed of collection and the speed of the subject (bird in this case), I would think there would be a color shift in the image. Does that make sense? It would have to be a really really fast succession to be successful.
Yes, the colour problem with a moving subject is an aspect that has puzzled me too with the Canon patent. Imagine you're taking a panning shot of a car at a race circuit; the car might be okay, but what would happen to the background if the camera is taking separate images with different colour filters?
There are systems that use rapidly changing colour filters, e.g. DLP projectors http://www.dlp.com/dlp_technology/dlp_technology_overview.asp
which have a rapidly spinning disc, but I can't see how this could work for a camera, because if each pixel can still only give a monochromatic reading (which is surely the case or the colour filters wouldn't be needed at all), then you would need to read and reset the pixels for each colour filter switch. I was under the impression that this isn't something that can be done at a high rate with current or near-future technology. If it could be done, then regardless of the colour filter switching, the technique could be used to greatly enhance dynamic range, as you would prevent overloading of pixels if you could read and reset during an exposure, so I would guess from the fact that they aren't already doing this that it can't be easy.
Re the Sep 5th announcement, didn't the original starter of the rumour on dpreview later post an apology to say that it had transpired it was just about some new printers, sorry for getting everyone so worked up?
Well i'd hate to burst everyones bubble, but if canon impliments this technology it wouldnt be a first. This is directly off of sigma's website regaurding their SD10.
FOVEON X3(R) Direct Image Sensor
Foveon X3(R) direct image sensor in the Sigma SD10 digital SLR can capture all RGB colors at each and every pixel. The revolutionary design of Foveon X3® direct image sensor features three layers of pixel sensors
Using three silicon-embedded layers of pixel sensors, stacked to take advantage of silicon's ability to absorb red, green, and blue light at different respective depths, the Foveon X3® direct image sensor can thereby directly capture full color and detail at each and every pixel location, without interpolation.
Other conventional image sensors feature just single layer of pixel sensors in a tiled mosaic pattern. Each pixel detects only one color of light, which has been filtered through a single red or green or blue color filter. As a result, two thirds of the color information at each pixel is blocked out. To compensate, the missing color is estimated through a complicated process of color interpolation, leading to color errors, color artifacts and loss of image detail.
Sigma SD10, powered by Foveon X3® direct image sensor, however, captures all three colors at every pixel location, ensuring the capture of full, complete color. It efficiently reproduces color more accurately, and offers sharper resolution, pixel for pixel, than any conventional image sensor....Show more →
You seem offended by my comments. They were not meant to be offensive, and I thought/hoped I had written my opinions with a "live and let live attitude". I extend apologies to all if they are due.
I am simply surprised by how much has been written on such a vague announcement. I spend time here in the Canon forum and appreciate cool gear as much as the next guy/gal. I just would personally spend time reading about technique than doing wild specualtion.
The key word here is "personally". I'm not trying tell people what they should or shouldn't spend their time on, and I'm not saying they are wrong for spending their time speculating. If they enjoy it they should do it.
At the same time, I think it should be ok for me to say I prefer to do differntly. You have to admit, most of these type threads end in an anti-climatic fashion. ;-)
You seem offended by my comments. They were not meant to be offensive, and I thought/hoped I had written my opinions with a "live and let live attitude". I extend apologies to all if they are due.
I am simply surprised by how much has been written on such a vague announcement. I spend time here in the Canon forum and appreciate cool gear as much as the next guy/gal. I just would personally spend time reading about technique than doing wild specualtion.
The key word here is "personally". I'm not trying tell people what they should or shouldn't spend their time on, and I'm not saying they are wrong for spending their time speculating. If they enjoy it they should do it.
At the same time, I think it should be ok for me to say I prefer to do differntly. You have to admit, most of these type threads end in an anti-climatic fashion. ;-)
I'm not at all offended by your comments, as they are quite measured and merely state preference. In truth, I am rarely offended by anything I see around here, but there are some things that irritate me. Two in particular come to mind;
- People who feel it necessary to enter a gear thread with the existential 'It's not the gear, it's you' mindset. These people somehow imagine that they are in on a secret that the rest of us never knew, or had forgotten in the heat of the discussion; that gear matters less than the person using it. With all due respect.... duh! When involved in a healthy and vigorous debate about a subject, I don't need to be reminded by some patronizing 'pure artist' that there are higher things than gear. Let me argue in peace!
- People who feel it necessary to enter a thread and inform everyone that it is off topic, wondering if they 'are really in the Canon forum, or somewhere else.' These people seem to believe that the contributors to the thread have the collective IQ of a snail and can't see for themselves that they are off topic. Or maybe they feel that they need to be a fight mediator or something. The overwhelming majority of threads on this forum are quite civil in tone and rarely go off topic. There is no need for the topic police, and their posts are disdainfully ignored by the people actually involved in the debate. Let the moderators decide what goes and what doesn't, as that is their job.
Your comments are not at all irritating, and you certainly need not apologize to me or anyone. I for one like to discuss, argue, and debate... sometimes for the sake of the debate. It is a good intellectual exercise, and I can learn and change through the process. Many of the people I have really come to respect on this forum are the same people I have gotten into long and heated arguments with. I have learned so much about photography by arguing on conceptions and misconceptions and having them corrected. There is nothing wrong with that, and I think we are all adult enough here to know our limits and priorities. I wish that everyone else understood that, and simply ignored the threads that did not interest them.
A forum should not just be an instruction manual for technique, but also a place to discuss. What I love about this place is that it is both.
Arka, Very well put - this is indeed a terrific place to hang out for all the reasons you point out.
Timmy, The point about Canon's technology is that it addresses the "RGB simultaneously" issue with a completely different approach.
Stevei
Whether it will ever work is clearly still open - switching the filters on and off fast enough may well be possible but reading the chip fast enough has always been recognized as the challenge (at least it was the first issue pointed out in the original thread). However, as Canon seems to be able to read chips quicker and quicker (more MP, higher FPS via more, bigger data transfer pipes?) they may eventually be able to do it fast enough. But if you want a 1/1000 shutter speed, you'll need to read each channel and reset every 330 or so microseconds - for a 6MP sensor and 12-bit depth you'd be trying to pull 30 GB/second in a burst off the chip! At 8 FPS on the 1DII with 8 MP and 12-bit depth that figure is a mere 0.1 GB/sec. If data transfer is the limiting factor in 8 FPS then even 1/300 shutterspeed will need 100 pipes. Probably why we haven't heard of a successful implementation yet! Pretty complicated chip design - perhaps it's still sci-fi after all..
Andy
) of an upcoming Canon announcement in Stockholm on Sep 5 and finding that this is when an international Photonics conference starts there. 