X-Trans is NOT Random

Started Sep 8, 2012 | Discussions
Daedalus2000
Senior MemberPosts: 4,182
Like?
Re: Genius - What is random?
In reply to liquid stereo, Sep 9, 2012

if we will be both be alive in 10 years?

I am not sure exactly what you try to assess through this type of questioning, though.. Can you clarify what exactly is your point? You have stated in other postings that you are an academic so you must know the vastness of the area of randomness/probability and the many of the philosophical interpretations of it. None of them apply to the Fujifilm sensor though...

liquid stereo wrote:

Dr. PhD. Please give me an example of something which is random. And by that I do not mean something which may be modeled as or via a random process.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chris Dodkin
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,957Gear list
Like?
What Fuji actually say is...
In reply to rattymouse, Sep 9, 2012

"Moiré is tackled at its root cause by the innovative color filter array of the new sensor. By enhancing the aperiodicity (randomness) in the array arrangement, the color filter minimizes the generation of moire and false colors, eliminating the necessity for an optical low-pass filter in the lens and enabling the sensor to capture the full “unfiltered” resolution and descriptive quality of the XF lens."

So they do not say it's a random distribution.

They say their design enhances the aperiodicity (randomness).

Just so we're sticking to the facts, and not ranting on about the wrong thing...

Full text here: http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_pro1/features/

-- hide signature --

http://www.dodkin.com
Chris@1D-Images.com
Mac Pro/MacBook Pro/iPods/iPhones/iPad

 Chris Dodkin's gear list:Chris Dodkin's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon EOS-1D Canon EOS-1D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 30D +34 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daedalus2000
Senior MemberPosts: 4,182
Like?
Re: What Fuji actually say is...
In reply to Chris Dodkin, Sep 9, 2012

This is the second link in the google "x-trans random" search:

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_e1/features/

The X-E1's sensor adopts the same high-performance 16M X-Trans CMOS found in the X Series flagship X-Pro1 model. Featuring an originally developed color filter array with a highly RANDOM pixel arrangement, its X-Trans CMOS sensor eliminates the need for an optical low-pass filter, which is used in conventional systems to inhibit moiré at the expense of resolution. The innovative array lets the X-Trans CMOS sensor capture unfiltered light from the lens and produce unprecedented resolution. The unique RANDOM arrangement of the color filter array is also highly effective in enhancing noise separation in high-sensitivity photography.

Chris Dodkin wrote:

"Moiré is tackled at its root cause by the innovative color filter array of the new sensor. By enhancing the aperiodicity (randomness) in the array arrangement, the color filter minimizes the generation of moire and false colors, eliminating the necessity for an optical low-pass filter in the lens and enabling the sensor to capture the full “unfiltered” resolution and descriptive quality of the XF lens."

So they do not say it's a random distribution.

They say their design enhances the aperiodicity (randomness).

Just so we're sticking to the facts, and not ranting on about the wrong thing...

Full text here: http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_pro1/features/

-- hide signature --

http://www.dodkin.com
Chris@1D-Images.com
Mac Pro/MacBook Pro/iPods/iPhones/iPad

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
noyo
Contributing MemberPosts: 663Gear list
Like?
Re: Random
In reply to Daedalus2000, Sep 9, 2012

I wouldn't want to be taking sides here but I actually agree with the OP in that the word RANDOM is being abused in Fujifilm marketing.

It also significantly annoys me but not enough for me to have created a new thread to complain about it. And until now, not enough for me contribute to this thread.

I have no wish to engage in puerile name calling nor in grandstanding my dubious intellectual capacity.

Ad hominem doesn't prove anything nor does it change facts. It certainly isn't becoming for would-be intelligent adults, irrespective of the attitude of others or 'who started it'.

Get a life people.

The fact remains the word RANDOM is incorrectly used in this context compared against any reasonable definition (check google & wikipedia) and I wish they wouldn't abuse it this way.

There is a clearly defined a pattern to the X-Trans sensor layout which may look complex or random to some but it isn't to me and indeed it is very clearly defined in many diagrams.

If the substance of this thread is insignificant to you then leave it alone. Why participate?

I figure the people who are sufficiently annoyed about the abuse of this word are those who have maths/statistics/science/engineering in their background where the word has a specific and significant meaning.

To see it misused is anathema to them and since we respect and appreciate freedom of thought and speech, why shouldn't they have their say?

Random.
--
Norman Young
http://www.noyo.eu

 noyo's gear list:noyo's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-M1 Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG Aspherical HSM Fujifilm XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
liquid stereo
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,974Gear list
Like?
Point
In reply to Daedalus2000, Sep 9, 2012

1. Random is a definition.
2. The notion that a built thing can be random is pure folly.

3. Saying something is random (or not) when one doesn't know what random means — theoretically and practically — is no better than mental masturbation.

Daedalus2000 wrote:
if we will be both be alive in 10 years?

I am not sure exactly what you try to assess through this type of questioning, though.. Can you clarify what exactly is your point? You have stated in other postings that you are an academic so you must know the vastness of the area of randomness/probability and the many of the philosophical interpretations of it. None of them apply to the Fujifilm sensor though...

liquid stereo wrote:

Dr. PhD. Please give me an example of something which is random. And by that I do not mean something which may be modeled as or via a random process.

 liquid stereo's gear list:liquid stereo's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon EOS 7D Fujifilm X-Pro1 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
liquid stereo
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,974Gear list
Like?
Re: What Fuji actually say is...
In reply to Daedalus2000, Sep 9, 2012

You're a scientist of some kind, yes? I assume you've published a paper of decent quality. If that is indeed the case you know that using a word like "highly" is subjective, unless some norm or normative relation is provided/established.

And now you've come to the internet to defend a specious argument. Fap, fap, fap.

Daedalus2000 wrote:
This is the second link in the google "x-trans random" search:

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_e1/features/

The X-E1's sensor adopts the same high-performance 16M X-Trans CMOS found in the X Series flagship X-Pro1 model. Featuring an originally developed color filter array with a highly RANDOM pixel arrangement, its X-Trans CMOS sensor eliminates the need for an optical low-pass filter, which is used in conventional systems to inhibit moiré at the expense of resolution. The innovative array lets the X-Trans CMOS sensor capture unfiltered light from the lens and produce unprecedented resolution. The unique RANDOM arrangement of the color filter array is also highly effective in enhancing noise separation in high-sensitivity photography.

Chris Dodkin wrote:

"Moiré is tackled at its root cause by the innovative color filter array of the new sensor. By enhancing the aperiodicity (randomness) in the array arrangement, the color filter minimizes the generation of moire and false colors, eliminating the necessity for an optical low-pass filter in the lens and enabling the sensor to capture the full “unfiltered” resolution and descriptive quality of the XF lens."

So they do not say it's a random distribution.

They say their design enhances the aperiodicity (randomness).

Just so we're sticking to the facts, and not ranting on about the wrong thing...

Full text here: http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_pro1/features/

-- hide signature --

http://www.dodkin.com
Chris@1D-Images.com
Mac Pro/MacBook Pro/iPods/iPhones/iPad

 liquid stereo's gear list:liquid stereo's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon EOS 7D Fujifilm X-Pro1 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
liquid stereo
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,974Gear list
Like?
Call Intel
In reply to noyo, Sep 9, 2012

Motorola, Portland Group, Cray, etc. and tell them they're wrong.

Tell them that their random number functions/generators are not random.

At least not as random as the intelligence exhibited in this p!ss poor thread.

noyo wrote:

I wouldn't want to be taking sides here but I actually agree with the OP in that the word RANDOM is being abused in Fujifilm marketing.

It also significantly annoys me but not enough for me to have created a new thread to complain about it. And until now, not enough for me contribute to this thread.

I have no wish to engage in puerile name calling nor in grandstanding my dubious intellectual capacity.

Ad hominem doesn't prove anything nor does it change facts. It certainly isn't becoming for would-be intelligent adults, irrespective of the attitude of others or 'who started it'.

Get a life people.

The fact remains the word RANDOM is incorrectly used in this context compared against any reasonable definition (check google & wikipedia) and I wish they wouldn't abuse it this way.

There is a clearly defined a pattern to the X-Trans sensor layout which may look complex or random to some but it isn't to me and indeed it is very clearly defined in many diagrams.

If the substance of this thread is insignificant to you then leave it alone. Why participate?

I figure the people who are sufficiently annoyed about the abuse of this word are those who have maths/statistics/science/engineering in their background where the word has a specific and significant meaning.

To see it misused is anathema to them and since we respect and appreciate freedom of thought and speech, why shouldn't they have their say?

Random.
--
Norman Young
http://www.noyo.eu

 liquid stereo's gear list:liquid stereo's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon EOS 7D Fujifilm X-Pro1 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RealXenuis
Senior MemberPosts: 1,153Gear list
Like?
Re: X-Trans is NOT Random
In reply to Daedalus2000, Sep 9, 2012

Yes, rattymouse is the king troll of the forums. Ask anyone, and do a quick search of his posts. He's unabashedly rude and never adds anything to any discussion. So thanks for legitimizing him.

Daedalus2000 wrote:

As a mathematician who spent years studying randomness I can verify that it is not random! It is actually upsetting to see companies abusing the use of these terms.

The only thing I would say is that randomness is related to complexity (in some advanced theories) so maybe they mean that it is a bit more complex to process?

BTW, I do not understand the rude reply from another member of the forum. Completely unnecessary. Rattymouse have you upset people in the past and now they shoot for no reason?

D

rattymouse wrote:

Fujifilm keeps reffering to the X-Trans sensor's layout as random. For example:

"The unique random arrangement of the [X-Tran's] colour filter array is also highly effective in enhancing noise separation in high-sensitivity photography."

This is nonsense. Anyone who looks at the X-Trans sensor can see that it is made up of a repeating/ pattern of RGB. In other worse, if you see one unit (pixel) of the sensor, you can "draw" the whole sensor, over and over and over again. If the sensor were truly random, you would not know what the next unit would look like. The X-Trans is not at all random, it just has a different layout than the Bayer pattern.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinion/s and/or suggestion/s of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

-- hide signature --

"Would you please just contract HIV already?" - dnersesian (and now "Banned for 21 days")

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RealXenuis
Senior MemberPosts: 1,153Gear list
Like?
Re: Impossible and yet it is.
In reply to rattymouse, Sep 9, 2012

NOthing you say is legitimate. You're just a troll. And you're also pretty dumb. No, I mean, really, you seem really very dumb.

rattymouse wrote:

liquid stereo wrote:

It would be impossible to build anything that's random, much less a color filter array.

Code up some "random" numbers on your computer and see what you get. That's not even random. That's why its truly referred to as a pseudo-random number generator.

I.e. the person affixing the moniker decides. And Fuji has decided.

Nonsense. Fuji's sensor is not random. Either the word has meaning or it doesnt. Blatant fan boys arent going to change the meaning of words to intelligent people.

Eat some grapes and relax.

Your hyperventilating over my simple question shows demonstratively that you need to relax. If you cannot handle someone's questions/opinions, perhaps forums are places you should not be.

rattymouse wrote:

Fujifilm keeps reffering to the X-Trans sensor's layout as random. For example:

"The unique random arrangement of the [X-Tran's] colour filter array is also highly effective in enhancing noise separation in high-sensitivity photography."

This is nonsense. Anyone who looks at the X-Trans sensor can see that it is made up of a repeating/ pattern of RGB. In other worse, if you see one unit (pixel) of the sensor, you can "draw" the whole sensor, over and over and over again. If the sensor were truly random, you would not know what the next unit would look like. The X-Trans is not at all random, it just has a different layout than the Bayer pattern.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinion/s and/or suggestion/s of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinion/s and/or suggestion/s of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

-- hide signature --

"Would you please just contract HIV already?" - dnersesian (and now "Banned for 21 days")

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Managarm
Regular MemberPosts: 306
Like?
While you're at it...
In reply to rattymouse, Sep 9, 2012

Here's another case for the justice league that still gives me sleepness nights:

In the 80s, Count Chocula stated in a commercial spot that his cereals are more delicious than Frankenberry's. This is NOT a scientifically proofed fact but nothing more than false propaganda made up by Chocula and spread by his cultish followers and blindfolded fanboys. Shame on you, Your Excellency!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RealXenuis
Senior MemberPosts: 1,153Gear list
Like?
Re: X-Trans is NOT Random
In reply to rattymouse, Sep 9, 2012

What would YOU do with the math? Babble and then say something mean to it? Criticize it? Call it a fanboy? Haha moron

rattymouse wrote:

Interesting reply. Far more intelligent than the savage attacks that the fan boys have to resort to.

I still see a repeating unit in the X Trans diagram that you produced, but will have to look at the math to see the results.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinion/s and/or suggestion/s of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

-- hide signature --

"Would you please just contract HIV already?" - dnersesian (and now "Banned for 21 days")

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jeff Seltzer
Senior MemberPosts: 1,712
Like?
Good grief, really??
In reply to rattymouse, Sep 9, 2012

Seriously, this is so dumb. "Random" is being used in the consumer-friendly way, and in a reasonable way. In actuality, you are right - it's not random. But, generating true randomness is very difficult. As someone with a post-graduate degree in statistics and experiment design, I actually know a lot about this - my guess, more than you. In fact, many argue that even programs like Excel or statistical packages like SPSS don't generate true random output. Random should unpredictable, and anytime you introduce a formula to generate the output, the true randomness of the output is arguably questionable.

So, would you prefer Fuji put an asterisk next to the word random with a long-winded scientific caveat?

So dumb. Really.

rattymouse wrote:

Fujifilm keeps reffering to the X-Trans sensor's layout as random. For example:

"The unique random arrangement of the [X-Tran's] colour filter array is also highly effective in enhancing noise separation in high-sensitivity photography."

This is nonsense. Anyone who looks at the X-Trans sensor can see that it is made up of a repeating/ pattern of RGB. In other worse, if you see one unit (pixel) of the sensor, you can "draw" the whole sensor, over and over and over again. If the sensor were truly random, you would not know what the next unit would look like. The X-Trans is not at all random, it just has a different layout than the Bayer pattern.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinion/s and/or suggestion/s of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RealXenuis
Senior MemberPosts: 1,153Gear list
Like?
Re: Well said
In reply to rattymouse, Sep 9, 2012

Wait...so you create a post to narrowly define/interpret what Fuji stated in order to make very specific claims about their terminology and meaning - personally not knowing what you're talking about - and then a PhD in a field that, we can all agree, would know more about it than you, answers your assertion and calls you out as a pedant (all is fair - you're the troll who creates trolly negative posts and threads CONSTANTLY on the forums ), and then your reply is to simply dismiss him as making a personal attack on you!!?? Hahah, you're in rare form

rattymouse wrote:

Daedalus2000 wrote:

I do not understand... You are telling us that we should accept incorrect terms from the marketing departments of companies because we can ignore them?

Do not get me wrong, I do not think it is a major issue, but I would expect that most people will say "fair enough rattymouse, you are right but it is not a big thing..." and move on. Not attack him...

That response would be reasonable. Dr. Physics needed to launch a personal attack. That exposes the bankrupt position that he holds.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinion/s and/or suggestion/s of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

-- hide signature --

"Would you please just contract HIV already?" - dnersesian (and now "Banned for 21 days")

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RealXenuis
Senior MemberPosts: 1,153Gear list
Like?
Re: X-Trans is NOT Random
In reply to rattymouse, Sep 9, 2012

Ahh, so now you resort to 'market share'. Nice one, Rush Limbaugh/Bill O'Reilly. Congratulations, you're in good company.

rattymouse wrote:

Charuteiro wrote:

rattymouse wrote:

I still see a repeating unit in the X Trans diagram that you produced, but will have to look at the math to see the results.

Yeah, here's the pattern:

(1) GBG/RGR/GBG/GRG/BGB/GRG

Then shift the next row to start with the (n+1) cell or grouping, e.g. , (2) RGR; then start the next row with (3) GBG; then (4) GRG; then (5) BGB; then (6) GRG; then start over again with (1) GBG.

So, the array is 6 x 6 as follows:

(1) GBG/RGR/GBG/GRG/BGB/GRG
(2) RGR/GBG/GRG/BGB/GRG/GBG
(3) GBG/GRG/BGB/GRG/GBG/RGR
(4) GRG/BGB/GRG/GBG/RGR/GBG
(5) BGB/GRG/GBG/RGR/GBG/GRG
(6) GRG/GBG/RGR/GBG/GRG/BGB

You don't think any of Fuji's competitors will read this, do you?

With an 8th place market share, I doubt anyone up top cares much about Fujifilm.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinion/s and/or suggestion/s of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

-- hide signature --

"Would you please just contract HIV already?" - dnersesian (and now "Banned for 21 days")

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RealXenuis
Senior MemberPosts: 1,153Gear list
Like?
Re: X-Trans is NOT Random
In reply to rattymouse, Sep 9, 2012

rattymouse wrote:

Banned for 21 days wrote:

Ratty,

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think the point you were trying to make was in reference to the development of better RAW support. It makes sense that a pattern, any sort of pattern, should make for easier coding than something that is truly random.

I'm no expert on RAW conversions or the technology required to get them. My point is specifically and only regarding the use of the word random. I see a pattern on the X Trans sensor and if it were truly random, that would not be true. A microscopic examination of the grain of film would show NO pattern at all.

But, a PhD and a person with obviously extensive math knowledge refuted your dispute/definition?? But....what would it take to convince you?

Not sure why anyone was compelled to attack man. Sad state of affairs.

Fujifilm groups are full of haters. They live just to spew hate. Such twerps are completely and totally incapable of affecting me in the slightest.

The fact that you continue to troll shows us all that we on the fuji forum do affect you. Every time you post an obviously flamey/trolly post, we all know that we've gotten under your skin with our reasonable opinions. That this guy is giving you an inch doesn't mean a thing - he wished HIV on me and my family. Incredible that you two are in bed together now.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinion/s and/or suggestion/s of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

-- hide signature --

"Would you please just contract HIV already?" - dnersesian (and now "Banned for 21 days")

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RealXenuis
Senior MemberPosts: 1,153Gear list
Like?
Re: Silly
In reply to Banned for 21 days, Sep 9, 2012

I'm starting to think you and Ratty are the same person. You had no problem creating a new username/acct after wishing HIV on me and my family. You're choosing to ignore the tone and history of Ratty, and the PhD's and mathy types who have refuted his claim. You can continue to ignore it, but the more you blindly back up ratty - the troll of the forum - the more It looks like you're Ratty and just have two accounts.

Regardless, you both belong together.

Banned for 21 days wrote:

Wanted to add something to this. In order to refute what he's saying, you'd also need to disagree with every dictionary definition of the word out there. Seems an unreasonable and exposed position to place one's self in, but I'll bite.

The most interesting thing about this conversation is not if ratty is right or wrong, which is pretty clear here, but why on earth someone would feel so offended as to attack his person over what is really just a logical point he is bringing up, even if you think it is not important.

I'm going to take a guess here and say that such illogical behavior stems from 2 things.

a. Sheep essentially following what they think is some sort of convention around here.

or

b. Once again more fanboyism pushed to lengths at which they will refute common knowledge in order to protect some kinship they feel they have with a brand.

I don't know. Neither of those seem worth it to me...

-- hide signature --

"Would you please just contract HIV already?" - dnersesian (and now "Banned for 21 days")

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RealXenuis
Senior MemberPosts: 1,153Gear list
Like?
Re: From randomness to chaos!
In reply to rattymouse, Sep 9, 2012

I wouldn't goad people into checking out your hate-filled forum posting history.

Also, you're obviously very unhappy. No ration human spends this much time trolling and being negative on the internets (or in real life) if they are a happy person. YOU're just very, very sad. I will pray for you

rattymouse wrote:

MuMinded wrote:

Just click thru his posting history.. He has a reputation here built by his own bad manners and insulting behavior..

I happily invite folks to read my posting history if they are truly interesting/bored. Especially the threads that I start. I stand behind everything I write, unlike some of the folks here.

Don't believe me, just hang around for a while and he will prove it to you himself.. His response to you was proof of it..

He's just a sad internet personality trying to make up for something lacking in his life I'm guessing.. Sad really..

Yep, something really lacking here. A great wife, two blessed kids, a job that allows me to buy whatever I want, whenever I want and travel all over the world. About the only thing I lack is energy from being busy so much.

MuMinded

HaterMinded would be a much more accurate name for you.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinion/s and/or suggestion/s of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

-- hide signature --

"Would you please just contract HIV already?" - dnersesian (and now "Banned for 21 days")

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daedalus2000
Senior MemberPosts: 4,182
Like?
Re: Point
In reply to liquid stereo, Sep 9, 2012

Amazing. You just destroyed 100-150 years of scientific research (probability/statistics etc) as "mental masturbation"! Apologies if I do not agree with you, I will stick with the science as we know it from the proper sources and not from RANDOM people on the internet!

If you really an academic and you teach, please do not tell these things to your students though...

You seem to know that computer generated random numbers are not really random. Have you seen this though?

http://www.random.org/

Let's not make it personal. It is not worth it. Thanks for your comment on the other thread.

D

Can you please send an e-mail

liquid stereo wrote:
1. Random is a definition.
2. The notion that a built thing can be random is pure folly.

3. Saying something is random (or not) when one doesn't know what random means — theoretically and practically — is no better than mental masturbation.

Daedalus2000 wrote:
if we will be both be alive in 10 years?

I am not sure exactly what you try to assess through this type of questioning, though.. Can you clarify what exactly is your point? You have stated in other postings that you are an academic so you must know the vastness of the area of randomness/probability and the many of the philosophical interpretations of it. None of them apply to the Fujifilm sensor though...

liquid stereo wrote:

Dr. PhD. Please give me an example of something which is random. And by that I do not mean something which may be modeled as or via a random process.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daedalus2000
Senior MemberPosts: 4,182
Like?
Re: X-Trans is NOT Random
In reply to RealXenuis, Sep 9, 2012

I see. I focused on the specific comment though and I was surprised by the type of exchange. As as an outsider here, I can tell you that it is quite "strong". Almost like everyone replies to the person, not the comment.

Let's move to other things, hey? Life is short.

RealXenuis wrote:

Yes, rattymouse is the king troll of the forums. Ask anyone, and do a quick search of his posts. He's unabashedly rude and never adds anything to any discussion. So thanks for legitimizing him.

Daedalus2000 wrote:

As a mathematician who spent years studying randomness I can verify that it is not random! It is actually upsetting to see companies abusing the use of these terms.

The only thing I would say is that randomness is related to complexity (in some advanced theories) so maybe they mean that it is a bit more complex to process?

BTW, I do not understand the rude reply from another member of the forum. Completely unnecessary. Rattymouse have you upset people in the past and now they shoot for no reason?

D

rattymouse wrote:

Fujifilm keeps reffering to the X-Trans sensor's layout as random. For example:

"The unique random arrangement of the [X-Tran's] colour filter array is also highly effective in enhancing noise separation in high-sensitivity photography."

This is nonsense. Anyone who looks at the X-Trans sensor can see that it is made up of a repeating/ pattern of RGB. In other worse, if you see one unit (pixel) of the sensor, you can "draw" the whole sensor, over and over and over again. If the sensor were truly random, you would not know what the next unit would look like. The X-Trans is not at all random, it just has a different layout than the Bayer pattern.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinion/s and/or suggestion/s of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

-- hide signature --

"Would you please just contract HIV already?" - dnersesian (and now "Banned for 21 days")

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: X-Trans is NOT Random
In reply to Daedalus2000, Sep 9, 2012

Not almost. EXACTLY. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Daedalus2000 wrote:

Almost like everyone replies to the person, not the comment.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads