100% accuracy for a bayer sensor is only theoretically possible where the subject is one single color across the frame.
Again, you simply have no idea what you're talking about. It's possible whenever the object has the same color (as in the A and B parts of L*A*B, ignoring the L) in 3 or 4 pixels, which is well over 99.9% of all images (and yes, I've done enough image analysis to back that).
And I've done enough shooting to back what I say. Sorry I have only real world experience to offer. I can find effects like that in easily 50% of bayer images shot, the hardest part is simply finding a full-size image link.
The fact is there are little color and detail errors all over in Bayer images most of time. And the fact is that across two different images taken at different times with totally different cameras with two different sensors with totally different resolutions, we see exactly the same issue as I have described previously. That is simply a Bayer problem, you can talk about how miraculously you take data from three spatial locations and then they magically become one without error all you like, but in reality the colors and details are sometimes borrowed from the "wrong" location and then you are left with a cup of poisoned sugar from the neighbors.
Humans can't even see the kind of color detail that you keep demanding .... that we measure.
See how the railing turns into the color of the box? And the railing turns into the color of the runners legs? These are things I saw first when the image was resized for the web! They are things that would show in a 5x7 print, never mind the glaring issues they would present in a larger one.
Is it too much to ask that a blue railing shows up as blue when you place a red box behind it? I ask simply that we value color accuracy enough so that images reflect what is there!
In any other case displacement of the samples WILL introduce some error. On average I'm sure it's slight, but it's not zero and I don't think in real conditions is better than the Foveon chips fare.
Then I would really suggest that you stick to your strong points, whatever those are, and leave thinking (and posting) to people who are actually good at it.
Well we'll both have to start looking for someone then, because you sure aren't the man for the job. It's like you're on a space station giving a lecture on how theory dictates the Earth must be flat. Just take a look out the window sometime!
One of my strong points is describing how something works so that someone less technical can more easily understand it, and that is what I continue to do. You strive for 100% technical perfection in communication which is nice, but it doesn't actually tell most people anything and you don't relate what you know enough to real world conditions or examples.
Sorry to be so rude, but you have been making a total, obnoxious fool of yourself for many years.
But at least I've been correct while doing so instead of misleading people while claiming absolute intellectual superiority as YOU have done. I'm more than happy to admit I'm obnoxious from time to time but it's the internet, you simply have to have a thick skin about these things. And this time around I have been very reasonable (but very persistent) so I'm not sure what has you so fired up.
I've explained things to you patient.
patientLY. Is there nothing so simple you cannot get it wrong? Sorry, cheap dig. But how can one resist against such a tirade from a position that is supposed to be of the highest intellect?
I've even pointed you to papers written by scientists at Foveon that contradict your claims.
That you CLAIM contradict my claims. I have in the meantime shown countless image examples demonstrating what I say for all to see! I don't see any contradictions.
You're not helping Foveon or Sigma.
I am in fact helping people understand the way real cameras shoot (Bayer and Foveon), just as you try to explain the theory of how they should shoot in ideal conditions.
Every time you post, all you do is further the image that many (most? all?) Foveon fans are some sort of cult that cannot be communicated with. Are you familiar with the saying "with friends like these, who needs enemies"?
You know, I think that readers can see that I very reasonably explain how things work in real life to theory wonks such as yourself, and frankly must admire my patience in having to correct the same flaws in arguments that Foveon detractors have been making for nearly a decade. The great thing about my posts is, that over time I explain things in different ways so people get a fresh take on the subject. Otherwise life would be rather boring, at least for me.
But I invite the reader to take a step back, and think how weird is it that there are some people who have been trying to bring down Foveon for nearly a decade. That continue to post any negative thing they can find or imagine. I post about Foveon stuff because I enjoy the cameras from a photographic and purely technical standpoint. What can possibly compel someone to post about something they dislike over a long period of time?
Joe, I think you're very intelligent but your inability to temper your theoretical understanding with real world examples seems like a real weakness to me. I'll just brush off this latest outburst as you being in a bad mood, I get that way myself sometime and hey, it's the internet so all is forgiven a day later (at least by me). But you need to take a step back again for a little while and collect yourself.
--
---> Kendall
