p.3 #1 · Better rather than just more megapixels ?
theSuede wrote:
What we desperately need is a technology that will increase the amount of information per pixel position. And now I'm not talking about the Foveon techs, that ran headfirst into a bricked off alleyway five years ago, but something GOOD.
Something with good light sensitivity, combined with a tunable wavelength response (so you can get reasonable colour!)
As I wrote in some other thread, we're now throwing away at least 70% of the light passing in through the lens. We don't need absolute 100% efficiency, as long as it's better than today.
On a related note, why are there no black & white digital cameras? No color filter array absorbing light, no demosaicing and related artefacts, superior resolution, ... surely there must be a market for it.
p.3 #2 · Better rather than just more megapixels ?
I would imagine because you can get better black and white images from a color RAW. When converting from a color image, you have three channels of light information instead of just one, and you can essentially do digital filtering, so there is no need to shoot with a red filter or yellow filter or orange filter, depending on the look you're going for.
p.3 #3 · Better rather than just more megapixels ?
Jman13 wrote:
I would imagine because you can get better black and white images from a color RAW. When converting from a color image, you have three channels of light information instead of just one, and you can essentially do digital filtering, so there is no need to shoot with a red filter or yellow filter or orange filter, depending on the look you're going for.
This was a true monochrome camera Kodak produced and frankly is sounded amazing. No AA filter and no Bayer matrix gave it exceptional resolution. Makes you wonder what could of been for Kodak had they brought such innovative products to market.
p.3 #4 · Better rather than just more megapixels ?
Toothwalker wrote:
On a related note, why are there no black & white digital cameras? No color filter array absorbing light, no demosaicing and related artefacts, superior resolution, ... surely there must be a market for it.
p.3 #5 · Better rather than just more megapixels ?
it was marketed. it helped Kodak less than zero since they lost money on it.
Herb...
millsart wrote:
This was a true monochrome camera Kodak produced and frankly is sounded amazing. No AA filter and no Bayer matrix gave it exceptional resolution. Makes you wonder what could of been for Kodak had they brought such innovative products to market.
p.3 #6 · Better rather than just more megapixels ?
hmm, 12mp looks great at most sizes i print at, but 45mp looks even better. extra mp help on downsized images as well. i'd always rather have more pixels unless i'm obviously losing something else, which doesn't really seem to be the case in the latest high mp cameras.
p.3 #7 · Better rather than just more megapixels ?
millsart wrote:
This was a true monochrome camera Kodak produced and frankly is sounded amazing. No AA filter and no Bayer matrix gave it exceptional resolution. Makes you wonder what could of been for Kodak had they brought such innovative products to market.
p.3 #8 · Better rather than just more megapixels ?
There's quite a lot of specialty mono sensors in the scientific field. Kodak has off-the shelf products in some sizes, often used for multispectral photography and such. I've handled a few, specialized towards art repro (or rather art documentation, repro includes artistic shading of surface structure and so on).
