Shutterbug article on RAW and Foveon vs. Bayer

This Shutterbug (Aug 2003) article is interesting, although it mixes several different discussions. The main discussion is about the generic advantages of RAW format over JPEG, but there is also a discussion about Foveon vs. Bayer, and a color optical resolution test between the SD-9 and Canon 10D.

http://www.jirvana.com/shutterbug/Aug._%23102_Raw_Deal.pdf

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops on the outbackphoto.com website...

Canon 10D:



Canon 1Ds:



SD-9:

sg10 said:

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Click to expand...

What a coincident that this news is nearly as old as uwe steinmueller, the author of that article and the owner of outbackphoto.....

The Problem is you won't get a point with this. We had a discussion about that when it was first released on outbackphoto and than again after somebody pointed out that shutterbug printed it. Sooner or later people came up with claims about how biased this stuff is. Or silly arguments like "we take photos of the real world and not of colored MTF charts".... their real world is black and white. But it still is pretty old news

Dominic

--
Regards from Old Europe,

Dominic

http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/dominic_gross

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Click to expand...

What a coincident that this news is nearly as old as uwe
steinmueller, the author of that article and the owner of
outbackphoto.....

Click to expand...

Its an Aug 2003 article.

Dominic Groß said:

The Problem is you won't get a point with this. We had a discussion
about that when it was first released on outbackphoto

Click to expand...

That was Aug 2003.

sg10 said:

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Click to expand...

What a coincident that this news is nearly as old as uwe
steinmueller, the author of that article and the owner of
outbackphoto.....

Click to expand...

Its an Aug 2003 article.

Click to expand...

search engine is down, hopefully I can proof it later. An article by Steinmueller in shutterbug using the pictures we all saw on outbackphoto in march was posted long before August...

sg10 said:

sg10 said:

The Problem is you won't get a point with this. We had a discussion
about that when it was first released on outbackphoto

Click to expand...

That was Aug 2003.

Click to expand...

No, those pictures apeared on outbackphoto in March 2003

--
Regards from Old Europe,

Dominic

http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/dominic_gross

I can't get the URL you offer (below)

sg10 said:

This Shutterbug (Aug 2003) article is interesting, although it
mixes several different discussions. The main discussion is about
the generic advantages of RAW format over JPEG, but there is also a
discussion about Foveon vs. Bayer, and a color optical resolution
test between the SD-9 and Canon 10D.

http://www.jirvana.com/shutterbug/Aug._%23102_Raw_Deal.pdf

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Canon 10D:



Canon 1Ds:



SD-9:

Click to expand...

sg10 said:

Its an Aug 2003 article.

Click to expand...

In the US, magazines have a bad case of premature ....
They usually come about six weeks early.

The article was in August Shutterbug, but hit the newsstands in late June or early July, and was discussed in this forum then.

Dominic,

So your point from old Europe is what? You're one-up? So what! Who cares? Your post sounds as if you got kicked out of bed last night and are still P.O'ed.

My impression is that this initial thread post is well taken. So what if it has been discussed before or somewhere else? The search engine for this site has been overloaded and unavailable for much of today making it impossible to check. I'd make the post too if I owned an SD-9. It's excellent "feel-good-medicine" for everyone (almost - obviously not you).

Sweeten up over there,

Cliff.

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Click to expand...

What a coincident that this news is nearly as old as uwe
steinmueller, the author of that article and the owner of
outbackphoto.....

The Problem is you won't get a point with this. We had a discussion
about that when it was first released on outbackphoto and than
again after somebody pointed out that shutterbug printed it. Sooner
or later people came up with claims about how biased this stuff is.
Or silly arguments like "we take photos of the real world and not
of colored MTF charts".... their real world is black and white. But
it still is pretty old news

Dominic

--
Regards from Old Europe,

Dominic

http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/dominic_gross

Click to expand...

--
Cliff. Johnston

In Dominic's defense, the issue of Foveon's consistent full color resolution vs Bayer's varying resolution with color has been discussed before, indeed, discussions about it somewhere lead to the development of the Foveon sensor. That on-going discussion takes place in just about every other message on the SD-9 as it releates to image quality.

The article itself, which discusses Foveon advantages among mostly other things, apears in the Aug 2003 issue of Shutterbu for the first time. And the old, tired discussion about SD-9 quality indeed directly relates to one test photo that's cited within it.

Cliff. Johnston said:

So your point from old Europe is what? You're one-up? So what!
Who cares? Your post sounds as if you got kicked out of bed last
night and are still P.O'ed.

My impression is that this initial thread post is well taken. So
what if it has been discussed before or somewhere else? The search
engine for this site has been overloaded and unavailable for much
of today making it impossible to check. I'd make the post too if I
owned an SD-9. It's excellent "feel-good-medicine" for everyone
(almost - obviously not you).

Sweeten up over there,

Cliff.

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Click to expand...

What a coincident that this news is nearly as old as uwe
steinmueller, the author of that article and the owner of
outbackphoto.....

The Problem is you won't get a point with this. We had a discussion
about that when it was first released on outbackphoto and than
again after somebody pointed out that shutterbug printed it. Sooner
or later people came up with claims about how biased this stuff is.
Or silly arguments like "we take photos of the real world and not
of colored MTF charts".... their real world is black and white. But
it still is pretty old news

Dominic

--
Regards from Old Europe,

Dominic

http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/dominic_gross

Click to expand...

--
Cliff. Johnston

Click to expand...

John Nuttall said:

I can't get the URL you offer (below)

Click to expand...

Strange, it works from here. Try going to the http://www.outbackphoto.com homepage, it is linked from there in their Aug 13, 2003 news blurb.

John Nuttall said:

sg10 said:

This Shutterbug (Aug 2003) article is interesting, although it
mixes several different discussions. The main discussion is about
the generic advantages of RAW format over JPEG, but there is also a
discussion about Foveon vs. Bayer, and a color optical resolution
test between the SD-9 and Canon 10D.

http://www.jirvana.com/shutterbug/Aug._%23102_Raw_Deal.pdf

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Canon 10D:



Canon 1Ds:



SD-9:

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Click to expand...

What a coincident that this news is nearly as old as uwe
steinmueller, the author of that article and the owner of
outbackphoto.....

Click to expand...

Its an Aug 2003 article.

Click to expand...

search engine is down, hopefully I can proof it later. An article
by Steinmueller in shutterbug using the pictures we all saw on
outbackphoto in march was posted long before August...

Click to expand...

As I said in my original post, those pictures are unrelated to the article itself other than a citing of a similar test, or perhaps the same test.

Unless maybe you are remembering when I mentioned the article existed in this forum, but didn't have a link yet.

sg10 said:

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Click to expand...

What a coincident that this news is nearly as old as uwe
steinmueller, the author of that article and the owner of
outbackphoto.....

Click to expand...

Its an Aug 2003 article.

Click to expand...

search engine is down, hopefully I can proof it later. An article
by Steinmueller in shutterbug using the pictures we all saw on
outbackphoto in march was posted long before August...

Click to expand...

As I said in my original post, those pictures are unrelated to the
article itself other than a citing of a similar test, or perhaps
the same test.

Click to expand...

Steve,
Here is the link to the original web-version of this article/test.

http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw/raw_05/essay.html

It has a link to RAW files. Download them and take a look at SD9 image at 300-400% magnification.

On the blue background resolution chart SD9 starts showing yellow blotches at 700 lines and stops resolving color at 1300 lines with severe aliasing. Same happens on all charts. Test is even not valid w/o testing Fuji S2 Pro since it has blue and red photosites on the same horizontal and vertical lines due to a 45 degree orientation.
I hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Larion

sg10 said:

This Shutterbug (Aug 2003) article is interesting, although it
mixes several different discussions. The main discussion is about
the generic advantages of RAW format over JPEG, but there is also a
discussion about Foveon vs. Bayer, and a color optical resolution
test between the SD-9 and Canon 10D.

http://www.jirvana.com/shutterbug/Aug._%23102_Raw_Deal.pdf

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Canon 10D:



Canon 1Ds:



SD-9:

Click to expand...

--
Lashka

first, who is Steve?

second, how does what you wrote fit into the context of what was written before.

third, how about starting a new thread if you want to discuss this.

fourth I was unable to download anything except the foveon for comparison. The 10d file won't open as either a tif or as a crw and the 1ds file is a thumbnail size print.

fifth ...

sixth ...

...

Mike

Larion said:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw/raw_05/essay.html

It has a link to RAW files. Download them and take a look at SD9
image at 300-400% magnification.
On the blue background resolution chart SD9 starts showing yellow
blotches at 700 lines and stops resolving color at 1300 lines with
severe aliasing. Same happens on all charts. Test is even not valid
w/o testing Fuji S2 Pro since it has blue and red photosites on the
same horizontal and vertical lines due to a 45 degree orientation.
I hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Larion

sg10 said:

This Shutterbug (Aug 2003) article is interesting, although it
mixes several different discussions. The main discussion is about
the generic advantages of RAW format over JPEG, but there is also a
discussion about Foveon vs. Bayer, and a color optical resolution
test between the SD-9 and Canon 10D.

http://www.jirvana.com/shutterbug/Aug._%23102_Raw_Deal.pdf

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Canon 10D:



Canon 1Ds:



SD-9:

Click to expand...

--
Lashka

Click to expand...

Docmaas,
First of all, Steve is the name of the person who stared this thread.
(I believe so, although I might be wrong)

Second, did you read the whole thread from the beginning. I think it was about how Bayer sensors are not good at resolving color, which is true.(except Fuji SuperCCD, although I should test it myself)

Third, why should I start a new thread when I was responding to the topic of this thread.
Fourth, it just proves how reliable this test is.
Fifth...
Sixth...
Now I am going to get drunk, if you excuse me.
Larion

docmaas said:

second, how does what you wrote fit into the context of what was
written before.

third, how about starting a new thread if you want to discuss this.

fourth I was unable to download anything except the foveon for
comparison. The 10d file won't open as either a tif or as a crw
and the 1ds file is a thumbnail size print.

fifth ...

sixth ...

...

Mike

Larion said:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw/raw_05/essay.html

It has a link to RAW files. Download them and take a look at SD9
image at 300-400% magnification.
On the blue background resolution chart SD9 starts showing yellow
blotches at 700 lines and stops resolving color at 1300 lines with
severe aliasing. Same happens on all charts. Test is even not valid
w/o testing Fuji S2 Pro since it has blue and red photosites on the
same horizontal and vertical lines due to a 45 degree orientation.
I hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Larion

sg10 said:

This Shutterbug (Aug 2003) article is interesting, although it
mixes several different discussions. The main discussion is about
the generic advantages of RAW format over JPEG, but there is also a
discussion about Foveon vs. Bayer, and a color optical resolution
test between the SD-9 and Canon 10D.

http://www.jirvana.com/shutterbug/Aug._%23102_Raw_Deal.pdf

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Canon 10D:



Canon 1Ds:



SD-9:

Click to expand...

--
Lashka

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Lashka

sg10,

There is no defence for rudeness, with all due respect.

Cliff.

sg10 said:

The article itself, which discusses Foveon advantages among mostly
other things, apears in the Aug 2003 issue of Shutterbu for the
first time. And the old, tired discussion about SD-9 quality
indeed directly relates to one test photo that's cited within it.

Cliff. Johnston said:

So your point from old Europe is what? You're one-up? So what!
Who cares? Your post sounds as if you got kicked out of bed last
night and are still P.O'ed.

My impression is that this initial thread post is well taken. So
what if it has been discussed before or somewhere else? The search
engine for this site has been overloaded and unavailable for much
of today making it impossible to check. I'd make the post too if I
owned an SD-9. It's excellent "feel-good-medicine" for everyone
(almost - obviously not you).

Sweeten up over there,

Cliff.

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Click to expand...

What a coincident that this news is nearly as old as uwe
steinmueller, the author of that article and the owner of
outbackphoto.....

The Problem is you won't get a point with this. We had a discussion
about that when it was first released on outbackphoto and than
again after somebody pointed out that shutterbug printed it. Sooner
or later people came up with claims about how biased this stuff is.
Or silly arguments like "we take photos of the real world and not
of colored MTF charts".... their real world is black and white. But
it still is pretty old news

Dominic

--
Regards from Old Europe,

Dominic

http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/dominic_gross

Click to expand...

--
Cliff. Johnston

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Cliff. Johnston

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=5511431

sg10 said:

This Shutterbug (Aug 2003) article is interesting, although it
mixes several different discussions. The main discussion is about
the generic advantages of RAW format over JPEG, but there is also a
discussion about Foveon vs. Bayer, and a color optical resolution
test between the SD-9 and Canon 10D.

http://www.jirvana.com/shutterbug/Aug._%23102_Raw_Deal.pdf

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Canon 10D:



Canon 1Ds:



SD-9:

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/sd9_images
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
http://www.beachbriss.com (eternal test site)

If you had a link to the article, why didn't you post it right then so it could've been read and discussed? The .pdf link I provided here was FTP'd to the web on 11 Aug 2003. Someone noted that the Shutterbug website featured the article, but we were dissappointed to find only the text of the lead paragraph or two was provided.

Unless you posted a link to the full article that I missed, a simple "thank you" will do.

Laurence Matson said:

sg10 said:

This Shutterbug (Aug 2003) article is interesting, although it
mixes several different discussions. The main discussion is about
the generic advantages of RAW format over JPEG, but there is also a
discussion about Foveon vs. Bayer, and a color optical resolution
test between the SD-9 and Canon 10D.

http://www.jirvana.com/shutterbug/Aug._%23102_Raw_Deal.pdf

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Canon 10D:



Canon 1Ds:



SD-9:

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/sd9_images
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
http://www.beachbriss.com (eternal test site)

Click to expand...

True enough...

Cliff. Johnston said:

There is no defence for rudeness, with all due respect.

Cliff.

sg10 said:

The article itself, which discusses Foveon advantages among mostly
other things, apears in the Aug 2003 issue of Shutterbu for the
first time. And the old, tired discussion about SD-9 quality
indeed directly relates to one test photo that's cited within it.

Cliff. Johnston said:

So your point from old Europe is what? You're one-up? So what!
Who cares? Your post sounds as if you got kicked out of bed last
night and are still P.O'ed.

My impression is that this initial thread post is well taken. So
what if it has been discussed before or somewhere else? The search
engine for this site has been overloaded and unavailable for much
of today making it impossible to check. I'd make the post too if I
owned an SD-9. It's excellent "feel-good-medicine" for everyone
(almost - obviously not you).

Sweeten up over there,

Cliff.

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Click to expand...

What a coincident that this news is nearly as old as uwe
steinmueller, the author of that article and the owner of
outbackphoto.....

The Problem is you won't get a point with this. We had a discussion
about that when it was first released on outbackphoto and than
again after somebody pointed out that shutterbug printed it. Sooner
or later people came up with claims about how biased this stuff is.
Or silly arguments like "we take photos of the real world and not
of colored MTF charts".... their real world is black and white. But
it still is pretty old news

Dominic

--
Regards from Old Europe,

Dominic

http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/dominic_gross

Click to expand...

--
Cliff. Johnston

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Cliff. Johnston

Click to expand...

Larion said:

Docmaas,
First of all, Steve is the name of the person who stared this thread.
(I believe so, although I might be wrong)
Second, did you read the whole thread from the beginning. I think
it was about how Bayer sensors are not good at resolving color,
which is true.(except Fuji SuperCCD, although I should test it
myself)

Click to expand...

I tested SuperCCD3 to the tune of 6000 shots. What most don't realize about SCCD3 is that it adds nothing overall in terms of resolution, not even the Fuji USA marketting dept is wacky enough to claim that offsetting everyother line by half a sensor-width is enough to magically buy a 1.6x gain in overall resolving power. What they say is that it increases vertical/horizontal resolution somewhat. What they "forget" to say is that this is at the expense of a directly corresponding loss in diagonal resolution--resulting in no overal change--and how could their be with no change whatsoever in sensor count or type?

Tipping their hand that they know that they "forgot" this important little factoid, they preempt the obvious counter argument with a (as far as I can tell, made up) statement that human's are more sensitive to v/h resolution, which makes SCCD3 images "more pleasing." As if it isn't glaringly obvious enough that this is simply bunk, why would one seek to emphasize what people are sensitive to at the expense of what they have more difficulty perceiving? Secondly, why buy a little more v/h res at the expense of diagonal when most presentation media has more difficulty displaying diagonally oriented detail than v/h? Fuji never provides a rationale.

SteveG158844 said:

Third, why should I start a new thread when I was responding to the
topic of this thread.
Fourth, it just proves how reliable this test is.

Click to expand...

It hardly takes "proof" to show that 230% of the red sensor count, 230% of the blue sensor count, and 117% of the green sensor count is going to make an enormous difference in real life color resolution.

While it is also true that the ($8000) 1Ds actually has a slightly higher sensor count than the SD-9 at 11M, it is also true that it spreads them out over a 70% larger FOV. So the relatively poor sensor density, and thus achievable color resolution, remains about unchanged. Although I certainly agree the larger FOV is highly desirable to those doing wide angle work.

SteveG158844 said:

Fifth...
Sixth...
Now I am going to get drunk, if you excuse me.
Larion

docmaas said:

second, how does what you wrote fit into the context of what was
written before.

third, how about starting a new thread if you want to discuss this.

fourth I was unable to download anything except the foveon for
comparison. The 10d file won't open as either a tif or as a crw
and the 1ds file is a thumbnail size print.

fifth ...

sixth ...

...

Mike

Larion said:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw/raw_05/essay.html

It has a link to RAW files. Download them and take a look at SD9
image at 300-400% magnification.
On the blue background resolution chart SD9 starts showing yellow
blotches at 700 lines and stops resolving color at 1300 lines with
severe aliasing. Same happens on all charts. Test is even not valid
w/o testing Fuji S2 Pro since it has blue and red photosites on the
same horizontal and vertical lines due to a 45 degree orientation.
I hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Larion

sg10 said:

This Shutterbug (Aug 2003) article is interesting, although it
mixes several different discussions. The main discussion is about
the generic advantages of RAW format over JPEG, but there is also a
discussion about Foveon vs. Bayer, and a color optical resolution
test between the SD-9 and Canon 10D.

http://www.jirvana.com/shutterbug/Aug._%23102_Raw_Deal.pdf

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Canon 10D:



Canon 1Ds:



SD-9:

Click to expand...

--
Lashka

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Lashka

Click to expand...

Remember these words.

sg10 said:

Cliff. Johnston said:

There is no defence for rudeness, with all due respect.

Cliff.

sg10 said:

The article itself, which discusses Foveon advantages among mostly
other things, apears in the Aug 2003 issue of Shutterbu for the
first time. And the old, tired discussion about SD-9 quality
indeed directly relates to one test photo that's cited within it.

Cliff. Johnston said:

So your point from old Europe is what? You're one-up? So what!
Who cares? Your post sounds as if you got kicked out of bed last
night and are still P.O'ed.

My impression is that this initial thread post is well taken. So
what if it has been discussed before or somewhere else? The search
engine for this site has been overloaded and unavailable for much
of today making it impossible to check. I'd make the post too if I
owned an SD-9. It's excellent "feel-good-medicine" for everyone
(almost - obviously not you).

Sweeten up over there,

Cliff.

Dominic Groß said:

sg10 said:

Unfortunately, the images embedded in the .pdf are unusable, but
there are similar Canon 10D, Canon 1Ds ($8000), and SD-9 test crops
on the outbackphoto.com website...

Click to expand...

What a coincident that this news is nearly as old as uwe
steinmueller, the author of that article and the owner of
outbackphoto.....

The Problem is you won't get a point with this. We had a discussion
about that when it was first released on outbackphoto and than
again after somebody pointed out that shutterbug printed it. Sooner
or later people came up with claims about how biased this stuff is.
Or silly arguments like "we take photos of the real world and not
of colored MTF charts".... their real world is black and white. But
it still is pretty old news

Dominic

--
Regards from Old Europe,

Dominic

http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/dominic_gross

Click to expand...

--
Cliff. Johnston

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Cliff. Johnston

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/sd9_images
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
http://www.beachbriss.com (eternal test site)