The relationship, or lack of one, between CFA accuracy & noise

[Yarilo]

Thanks, have you had any of the issues you mentioned regarding the sensor becoming loose (I remember reading about that) and if so, how did you fix it?

Mine Kodaks are fine for now, but the probability of the sensor falling out of its place is there, on other forum I’ve seen quite a few owners reporting that. Some of them reported this issue more than once, with different copies they had.

Best option is to prevent this from happening by applying epoxy glue while sensor is still in place. But then again, some owners reported focusing issues after that. If sensor already fallen off, this isn’t easy to calibrate, as any compound used to hold the sensor should be hard enough to keep sensor in place while allowing adjustments right after applying it. So it’s better to find a repairman who will be willing to take that job.

There is also an issue with IR filter “corrosion” (similar to M9 one) that was reported by some owners of 14nx/SLR models. One reported somewhere here on DPR that out of six SLRs he own, all of them exhibit this issue to some degree. Affected spots look like craters on final images. I haven’t seen any reports of such kind regarding 14N model.

 

[JimKasson]

What is "visual accuracy"? Eyeballing? Double blind testing?

Eyeballing. Because I see no use for low dEs in the profile check report when some colors are obviously incorrect when looking at the photographs on calibrated monitor. At least that is my experience with GFX50sII and Cobalt Imaging "repro" profiles that are advertised as having as-low-dEs-as-possible.

Did you measure the Delta-Es?

Lighting is critical when making profiles. Reflections from the environment can throw everything off.

 

[JimKasson]

What is "visual accuracy"? Eyeballing? Double blind testing?

Eyeballing.

The name of this forum is Photographic Science and Technology.

 

[Yarilo]

What is "visual accuracy"? Eyeballing? Double blind testing?

Eyeballing. Because I see no use for low dEs in the profile check report when some colors are obviously incorrect when looking at the photographs on calibrated monitor. At least that is my experience with GFX50sII and Cobalt Imaging "repro" profiles that are advertised as having as-low-dEs-as-possible.

Did you measure the Delta-Es?

For cobalt ones - no. For mine LRPD shows report for one of the profiles as following:

White Balance dE(a*b*): 0.8

Tone Response: dL2000*: 1.2

Color Accuracy dE2000: 1.1

90th Percentile Color Accuracy dE2000: 1.6

But knowledge of dEs is of little use to me when colors are obviously off when comparing original objects and photographs of them.

OTOH, is there a reliable way to measure dE on actual human skin?

Lighting is critical when making profiles. Reflections from the environment can throw everything off.

I know that. And Cobalt knows that too, I beleive.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/yarilo/

 

[Yarilo]

What is "visual accuracy"? Eyeballing? Double blind testing?

Eyeballing.

The name of this forum is Photographic Science and Technology.

Well, science and technology have a value when they are applied to something practical. Your original post contain claims that extend beyond measuring dEs. I just pointed out that conclusions based on dE numbers not necessarily translate to real-world scenarios. I'm not to convince anyone on that idea. But at least I see that I'm not alone here, as others also expressed similar view.