More pixels?

Started Mar 2, 2014 | Discussions thread
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 59,020
Re: 3,000,000,000,000

altair8800 wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

altair8800 wrote:

Allan Olesen wrote:

altair8800 wrote:

If you separate the full sensor into 36 million groups and count the photons in each, you may come out ahead of what we have now.
By the time that math is done, the bird is miles away.

I was replying to a statement about dynamic range, not processing speed.

In my reply to falconeyes, I was takking about his true binary sensor which is short on dynamic range. He did not mention any data processing to give reasonable dynamic range.

A sensor just has to count photons. You won't see anything without 'data processing' which will always simply map photon counts to tonal values, no different for the true binary sensor.

I assume mapping photon counts to tonal values means you lose the ten trillion pixel resolution. The FPS would be too low anyway. Frames Per Fortnight?

Well, you'd never print 'ten trillion pixels' anyway, would you - and if you have on photon pixels the readout mechanism is very different - you wouldn't think that with such a radical design all the peripheral electronics would stay the same - and just having a binary output from the pixels makes some things quite simple. Just think of it as a completely flexible sensor, where you can make the decision how to trade resolution agains DR. You're always making that trade with any camera, anyway - just the one photon pixel gives you the ultimate in flexibility of the trade.

-- hide signature --


Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow