How does everyone feel about interpolated pictures?

[JudyC]

I am thinking of getting the S602 but I am a little concerned that it interpolates the pictures to get them up to 6mp. How does anyone who already has one of the earlier cameras feel about this? Is the picture quality true? --Judy C

 

[KC63881]

for me, I just treat it as a very good 3MP camera. I don't worry so much about the interpolation but I'm very pleased with the results when I printed sample 6MP pics on A3 paper.

I am thinking of getting the S602 but I am a little concerned that
it interpolates the pictures to get them up to 6mp. How does
anyone who already has one of the earlier cameras feel about this?
Is the picture quality true?
--
Judy C

 

[Richard Dunn]

I am thinking of getting the S602 but I am a little concerned that
it interpolates the pictures to get them up to 6mp. How does
anyone who already has one of the earlier cameras feel about this?
Is the picture quality true?
--
Judy C

Judy,

I feel fine about it especially as it doesnt. Fuji's CCD starts with a 6m image derived from its 3m sensors. The arrangement of them allows a fair representation of a 4m resolution if viewed side by side with other cameras but the other data is not just made up it is based on real information and provides the ability to enlarge these images up even further without producinfg jaggies.

All cameras interpolate. The G2 a very nice camera has 4m ccd elements. It takes 4 of these to produce 1 pixel so it too interpolates the pixel.

What is different is that it produces sharper images from the camera but this is because the G2 does a lot of processing in camera. It doesn't allow as much enlargement though because it is pre sharpened.

The S602 is a good compromise it produces very good images straight from the camera, lovely colour and definition and yet it is not so over processed that you can't do a fair bit of tweaking/ enlarging yourself.

Reading this back it doesn't sound very clear but there are many threads on this in this forum. run a search on interpolation and make your brain hurt.
--Best Wishes,Richard DunnWarwick UK http://www.pbase.com/rmwd/galleries

 

[slipstream]

Hi Judy I gave quite an elaborate respons on this in an older thread which talks about this interpolation and the SuperCCD here is a link directly to my answer on this.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=2507512

But you shouldn't be concerned about this there is no reason at all. But ofcourse you shouldn't expect to have a 6M camera neither it isn't.

I am thinking of getting the S602 but I am a little concerned that
it interpolates the pictures to get them up to 6mp. How does
anyone who already has one of the earlier cameras feel about this?
Is the picture quality true?
--
Judy C

--SlipStreamMy homepage http://users.skynet.be/slipstream/PBase : http://www.pbase.com/slipstream/galleries/

 

[JohnS17182]

Judy,

There are many other excellent threads in the forum on that topic. You might have some fun checking them out.

My understanding of the issue is that all digital sensors must use interpolation (except perhaps the new Foveon). Fuji's is just a little bit different, as dictated by the non-square array layout. Furthermore, when you display or print, further interpolation is used by all, unless the output pixels map exactly to the stored pixels, which is rarely the case. More important are true resolution, which is a combination of sensor pixel density and optics, and native (in-camera) color rendition and noise levels, which depend both on hardware and software. Additionally, other items, such as in-camera sharpening and image compression, affect the image.

If you will post-process the image yourself, many cameras can provide excellent results. (I like the 6mp fine with minimal sharpening out of the Fuji 6900, which I own, for this.) For straight-out-of-the-camera to 5x7 prints or to video display, Fuji is excellent for me at 3mp fine. I have also used both Olympus and Canon digitals, and Fuji provides the best out-of-the-camera colors, in my opinion.

In summary, although Fuji's somewhat different interpolation method is an interesting topic for discussion, I wouldn't focus upon it as the one killer issue.

--JohnS

I am thinking of getting the S602 but I am a little concerned that
it interpolates the pictures to get them up to 6mp. How does
anyone who already has one of the earlier cameras feel about this?
Is the picture quality true?
--
Judy C

--JohnS

 

[RJNedimyer]

I am thinking of getting the S602 but I am a little concerned that
it interpolates the pictures to get them up to 6mp. How does
anyone who already has one of the earlier cameras feel about this?
Is the picture quality true?
--
Judy C

All digital cameras interpolate. Possible exception is the S3 technology and it still has to combine or interpolate information.

This includes even the best Nikon, Canon, Olympus and of course Fuji.

Fuji commits the ultimate sin however by doing it considerably better the the huge leaders and thus must be stomped on.

There once was a US Presidential campain that almost succeeded in defeating the inmcumbent by telling everyone in a secretive whisper the President's wife was a well known "thespian" [said quietly and quickly it sounds like something else that would probably be banned on this forum].

The reason I put this information in is by pointing the finger one frequently can escape being examined themselves. NO I AM NOT accusing anyone I have NO proof. But who stands to benfit if Fuji does not sell al lot of cameras?

--RayRJNedimyer

 

[Jim Gilliland]

I am thinking of getting the S602 but I am a little concerned that
it interpolates the pictures to get them up to 6mp. How does
anyone who already has one of the earlier cameras feel about this?
Is the picture quality true?

Well, if you're buying it expecting it to produce an image with 6mp resolution, then you should be concerned - because it won't do that. It is a 3mp camera - regardless of filesize, that's the resolution that you'll get.

The Fuji cameras use interpolation because that's the only way they can maximize the resolution capabilities of their CCDs. The CCD has an unusual geometry - Fuji claims that it trades diagonal resolution for horizontal and vertical resolution. Whether or not that is an advantage is subject to the eye of the beholder - I don't see a great deal of benefit when I look at Fuji pictures, but some here swear by it.

But the important thing to realize is that Fuji needs to use the larger filesize so that they can give you the full 3mp of resolution that their CCD is capable of producing. It's because of the unusual geometry.

You still occasionally see someone claiming that the Fuji magically gives you more than 3mp of resolution, but since that's mathematically impossible, you can safely ignore such statements.

I wouldn't worry so much about the interpolation - just make sure that you're happy with the image quality that the camera produces. If you compare the Fuji's with other 3mp cameras, you'll find that they are among the very best.

And remember - it takes a LOT more than resolution to produce a good photograph. I'm reticent to make too many judgements about the 602 yet, since it's not shipping and hasn't been reviewed, but it appears that it will have an excellent balance of image resolution, color accuracy, usable features, and good ergonomics. I've got one on order.

 

[Jared Hunter]

All cameras interpolate. I was skeptical of the 6Mp's as well until I did some comparisons to other cameras. Check them out here:
http://www.pbase.com/mu/fuji_3mp_vs

Surprisingly, a 6Mp from a Fuji yielded almost as much detail as a 4Mp Sony and IMO was actually better than a 5Mp Minolta Dimage 7.

The Fuji 6Mp's are meant to be resampled to the standard 3Mp dimensions (2048 x 1536) before comparison to other 3Mp cameras. The 6Mp is usually only used for printing. However, note that you will resolve more actual picture detail from a 6Mp than if the Fuji had output a 3Mp and resampled in-camera. Here's an example of a 6Mp resampled to 3Mp in which I've tried to extract as much detail as possible in the final image:
http://www.pbase.com/image/1718794

I don't think there is any other 3Mp non-pro consumer camera that resolve the level of detail as a Fuji. The only drawback is that it takes a little extra work in a photo-editor to maximize the quality, but the potential is there...which isn't always the case with images from other cameras.

I am thinking of getting the S602 but I am a little concerned that
it interpolates the pictures to get them up to 6mp. How does
anyone who already has one of the earlier cameras feel about this?
Is the picture quality true?
--
Judy C

 

[Gordon Whittaker]

Do NOT be concerned! The camera is better than any 3M or 6m on the market. That is the BOTTM Line!

 

[kad]

I think the Fuji's come out really well but in the 3rd example I think I might prefer your optimized D7. Mostly because of the white halo surrounding that black sign and the haloing around the red and blue lettering on the hanging banner.(Did you have to take any noise out of the sky for the 6900? The original for the D7 is baaad )

And the second example with the signs comparing the Fuji/minolta/canon/kodak- which had the most realistic colors? Minolta looks washed out,the kodak seems odd to me,the fuji red I don't mind (but seems a little pumped up)and the canon might be best for me if the colors were tweaked ever so slightly..

Do NOT be concerned! The camera is better than any 3M or 6m on
the market. That is the BOTTM Line!

 

[Thomas L]

Yes, 3MP - no doubt about that. But 6MP....? So far there is only Canon D60 in that category (and the other DSLRs to come), and the image quality from that camera is just superb!!

Do NOT be concerned! The camera is better than any 3M or 6m on
the market. That is the BOTTM Line!

 

[Jared Hunter]

I think the Fuji's come out really well but in the 3rd example I
think I might prefer your optimized D7. Mostly because of the white
halo surrounding that black sign and the haloing around the red and
blue lettering on the hanging banner.(Did you have to take any
noise out of the sky for the 6900? The original for the D7 is
baaad )

I would ignore the halos - they probably wouldn't be there if the image had been shot in soft rather than normal sharpness. Yes, the 6900 sky was denoised. It had about half the noise of the D7.

And the second example with the signs comparing the
Fuji/minolta/canon/kodak- which had the most realistic colors?
Minolta looks washed out,the kodak seems odd to me,the fuji red I
don't mind (but seems a little pumped up)and the canon might be
best for me if the colors were tweaked ever so slightly..

I don't know because I did not shoot those pictures. They were shot on different days so I wouldn't use them for comparing colors. I was only interested in relative sharpness.

Do NOT be concerned! The camera is better than any 3M or 6m on
the market. That is the BOTTM Line!

Gordy is mistaken about 6m. The Fuji is only putting out at most 3Mp of information which doesn't fit in the standard 2048 x 1536 3Mp file size. That is why they put it into a 6Mp file and let you resample as required. The difference with other 3Mp cameras is that they can only produce 3Mp files which cannot contain all the possible information a 3Mp CCD sensor can pick up. Fuji is better at maximizing data extraction from 3Mp CCDs than other makers.

 

[slipstream]

Hi Jared could you tell us what you exactly did to these pictures and how?

Your results seem to be better than mine. I tried to do the same on the 602 china town pic but although I'm happy with my result yousr is better so i'd like to know.

Thx

 

[Jim Gilliland]

Do NOT be concerned! The camera is better than any 3M or 6m on
the market. That is the BOTTM Line!

Gordy is mistaken about 6m.

Indeed, Gordy seems a bit overenthusiastic.

The Fuji is only putting out at most
3Mp of information which doesn't fit in the standard 2048 x 1536
3Mp file size. That is why they put it into a 6Mp file and let you
resample as required. The difference with other 3Mp cameras is that
they can only produce 3Mp files which cannot contain all the
possible information a 3Mp CCD sensor can pick up.

Actually, most 3mp cameras have no trouble at all recording all of the available image information in a 3mp file format. They're not losing anything. Since their CCD geometries match the format of the image data in the file, they can map the cells of the CCD directly to the file format. They have to do some interpolation in the color space, but other than that it is a direct feed to the image file. Only Fuji, with its unusual CCD geometry, must resort to the larger file to capture the max resolution.

The Fuji is a 3 megapixel camera, and a very good one at that. I see no need to try to make it more than that.

 

[Jim Gilliland]

All cameras interpolate. I was skeptical of the 6Mp's as well until
I did some comparisons to other cameras. Check them out here:
http://www.pbase.com/mu/fuji_3mp_vs

Surprisingly, a 6Mp from a Fuji yielded almost as much detail as a
4Mp Sony and IMO was actually better than a 5Mp Minolta Dimage 7.

Jared, I'm not sure how you produced all these comparisons, but it is clear that at least some of them are invalid. Your picture 2a, for example, appears to be reduced enough to render all comparisons meaningless. And 2b is troublesome as well - if you're showing me "unmodified crops" as you claim, then why aren't the last two 3mp images the same size?

There are two possibilities - either one was resized, or the original images weren't covering the same area. Either way, the comparison becomes meaningless.

I can't be sure how you produced the others. I'm not trying to pick on you, just making the point that for comparisons to be meaningful at all, the images have to be treated very carefully.

 

[slipstream]

Jared, I'm not sure how you produced all these comparisons, but it
is clear that at least some of them are invalid. Your picture 2a,
for example, appears to be reduced enough to render all comparisons
meaningless. And 2b is troublesome as well - if you're showing me
"unmodified crops" as you claim, then why aren't the last two 3mp
images the same size?

Actually thats because a D30 uses another format than most cameras instead of a 4:3 image you get a 3:2 image like with 35mm film cameras. D30 image instead of 2048x1536 is 2160x1440 but both are 3MP.

And concerning 2a i dont think he means to compare anything there but just wants to show the images he started out with before making the crops. It was the field of view which was important not the quality.

There are two possibilities - either one was resized, or the
original images weren't covering the same area. Either way, the
comparison becomes meaningless.

I can't be sure how you produced the others. I'm not trying to
pick on you, just making the point that for comparisons to be
meaningful at all, the images have to be treated very carefully.

 

[Jim Gilliland]

Jared, I'm not sure how you produced all these comparisons, but it
is clear that at least some of them are invalid. Your picture 2a,
for example, appears to be reduced enough to render all comparisons
meaningless. And 2b is troublesome as well - if you're showing me
"unmodified crops" as you claim, then why aren't the last two 3mp
images the same size?

Actually thats because a D30 uses another format than most cameras
instead of a 4:3 image you get a 3:2 image like with 35mm film
cameras. D30 image instead of 2048x1536 is 2160x1440 but both are
3MP.
And concerning 2a i dont think he means to compare anything there
but just wants to show the images he started out with before making
the crops. It was the field of view which was important not the
quality.

Thanks for the explanations. After looking at Jared's comparisons, I decided to try some of my own. I'll start a new thread to show them here.

 

[Jim Gilliland]

I decided to try some of my own. I'll start a new thread to show them here.

Now that I think of it, maybe I can't do that. For my comparisons, I started with some of the sample shots from Steve's Digicams. Since they are copyrighted images, I don't suppose I can post them in this way without infringing.

Does anyone know what the policies are of the various digicam sites regarding reuse of images?

 

[Richard Dunn]

Actually, most 3mp cameras have no trouble at all recording all of
the available image information in a 3mp file format. They're not
losing anything. Since their CCD geometries match the format of
the image data in the file, they can map the cells of the CCD
directly to the file format.

Jim, the fuji Super CCD in 6m mode also has no geometric corrections to make to remap. Eack output pixel is created from the colour information of 4 surrounding ccd element or 4 surrounding interpoloaterd ccd elements.

They have to do some interpolation in
the color space, but other than that it is a direct feed to the
image file.

This interpolation in the colour space is just as significant only here each output pixel gets its colour information from 4 adjacent ccd elements and these vary according to where that pixel is in space. It is not a straight geometric mapping as I see it. The colour information is just as important as information regarding edge definition which mainly come from two non adjacent green sensors, so once again no straight forward geometric map.

Only Fuji, with its unusual CCD geometry, must resort
to the larger file to capture the max resolution.

The Fuji uses its unusual geometry and the highe gain lower noise information from its larger sensors to produce its 6m output image.

The Fuji is a 3 megapixel camera, and a very good one at that. I
see no need to try to make it more than that.

Yes we all agree with that.

 

[SergeiK]

All cameras interpolate. I was skeptical of the 6Mp's as well until
I did some comparisons to other cameras. Check them out here:
http://www.pbase.com/mu/fuji_3mp_vs

Surprisingly, a 6Mp from a Fuji yielded almost as much detail as a
4Mp Sony and IMO was actually better than a 5Mp Minolta Dimage 7.

Jared, I'm not sure how you produced all these comparisons, but it
is clear that at least some of them are invalid. Your picture 2a,
for example, appears to be reduced enough to render all comparisons
meaningless. And 2b is troublesome as well - if you're showing me
"unmodified crops" as you claim, then why aren't the last two 3mp
images the same size?

Once I tried to explain Fuji resolving power from a geometrical point of view
but failed bacause I had thought that it had the true honeycomb pattern.
Considering the fact that it has tilted square pattern, the vertical and
horisontal frequency of alternating lines is obtained by multiplying the
alternating pixel frequency to sqrt(2) ~ 1.4

Consequently it has horisontal and vertical resolution as a camera with
3Mp*1.4 ~ 4.2Mp sensor.
But then any following post-processing of the image as
noise-reduction, sharpening and a lossy compression eats
highest frequences and decreases overall resolution.

I think Fuji can be fairly positioned somewhere between 3Mp and 4Mp cameras closer to 4Mp class.

There are two possibilities - either one was resized, or the
original images weren't covering the same area. Either way, the
comparison becomes meaningless.

I can't be sure how you produced the others. I'm not trying to
pick on you, just making the point that for comparisons to be
meaningful at all, the images have to be treated very carefully.