Jump to content

Help me out here


Keith Walters

Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member
The actual situation is more complex than just green vs. red and blue. Kindly Google "Opponent axis" as a starting point.

Yes, it's more complex. For our purposes, though, consider that a typical approximate luminance equation looks something like:

 

Y = 0.2R + 0.7G + 0.1B

 

Of course the real ones have coefficients to three or four decimal places, but the weighting of green is quite clear.

 

Thanks, I'll look for Mach bands, too.

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Premium Member
This is something I've been wondering about. A 2/3" chip puts 1920 photosites across an image area 0.378" wide, which works out to a pitch of 0.0002". Standard machine shop work is done to +/- 0.002", and really high end stuff sometimes achieves +/- 0.0001", but it ain't cheap and it ain't easy.

 

How do they glue those suckers onto a prism block with such precision that the photosites line up? Or do they even try? Some of the specs I've seen (from Panasonic IIRC) give total numbers of pixels about 5% higher than the standard format, so my guess is that they put a test pattern thru the block and use it to hardwire a correction for where the chips actually landed.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Well obviously they use something other than ordinary machine shop equipment. To get the photoecthing masks aligned to actually fabricate the chips requires fancy micro-stepping motors, which have far greater precision than something you would use for everyday precision milling.

 

When the first 3CCD Betacams came out I was shown a picture of the jig they use for aligning the chips on the prism faces. There was nothing particularly fancy-looking about it. They just applied some sort of ultra-clear epoxy to the prism and CCD faces, and the jig apparently just pushes them into place. An image of a pair of crosshairs is focussed onto the prism block, and the micromanipulators automatically moved the CCDs around until the red, green and blue images were in register. Once the epoxy sets they remain in register.

 

Apparently the earliest alignments were done much the same way, but by a human operator watching the monitor screen and turning a series of mechanical knobs. The registration only has to be good enough that any errors are not noticeable to the average viewer, so I think you may be over-estimating the accuracy required

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Maybe Jim doesn't like being called a liar over and over. When I opened a RED file in after effects it was a 4K file. What matters is what that file looks like when on TV or projected in a film theater. I don't know why, but I (me, just me) found the RED footage texture to be nicer than that of the f35 (at NAB). But we are splitting hairs. It's evolving all of the time. I think the more interesting part of the whole RED thing is the RAW workflow (and I've got it working fine).

 

bob

Sorry, what is your point?

There are no doubt thousands of posts in Reduser making broadly similar statements to yours, saying what a fine camera the RED is and so on.

The number of critics on this forum are truly microscopic by comparison.

A totally insignificant number. Yet JJ seems to spend an enormous amount of his personal energy arguing with them.

He has stopped posting on Reduser, (albeit temporarily), but he seems unable to drag himself away from the train wreck that this forum sometimes turns into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Instead, people like George Lucas (!...) always see your glass as half-empty.

 

It could be harmless if the Jim's obsession on the Epic would not be kind of lame.

 

:(

Does anybody here have any idea what this prat is babbling about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
An image of a pair of crosshairs is focussed onto the prism block, and the micromanipulators automatically moved the CCDs around until the red, green and blue images were in register. .... The registration only has to be good enough that any errors are not noticeable to the average viewer, so I think you may be over-estimating the accuracy required

Aha, Brilliant! They tweak 'em while the glue is wet. I knew there had to be a trick to it. Thanks for the info.

 

The same eye/brain thing I mentioned earlier, the automatic fitting of chroma to luma, would indeed render any small remaining error irrelevant.

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anybody here have any idea what this prat is babbling about?

 

Better show his posts to a Cryptographer, maybe he can decipher them

Poor, very poor. Same usual clowns trying ad nauseum the old play. I thought you were a creative, Max. Feelings of frustration for absence of arguments or just lack of understanding? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Feelings of frustration for absence of arguments or just lack of understanding? ;)

Complete lack of understanding, by Max and everyone else, I would venture to say.

Here's an idea: Why not just post in your own native language. It would make at least as much sense to most of us, and there's a slight chance we might be able to find someone who can translate better than you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Complete lack of understanding, by Max and everyone else, I would venture to say.

Here's an idea: Why not just post in your own native language. It would make at least as much sense to most of us, and there's a slight chance we might be able to find someone who can translate better than you.

Your old trick is already known, as well your agenda. Are your ideas worth money? Or anything else beyond your hateful rants against Jim Jannard and his products or supporters for two (!) years, Keith 'Jim Murdoch' Walters ?

 

I make you a favour (or do you prefer favor? :D) and will post the part you forgot to quote above:

 

I definitely can't be taken in any way other than as RED fan, even though the most recent announcement.

 

In part 'cause of these silly approaches to the art of making (big) pictures.

 

Maybe you may think that your uneducated engineering obsession is more important than what a contemporary Iklimler/Climates* [imdb LINK] can bring.

 

Uneducated, not because that's your backyard or not. As matter of fact, I don't give a damn what it really is -- other than the sad clown part since you were used to post here as Jim Murdoch.

 

Uneducated, because you seem to know about what the big pictures are made. You does seem...

 

(...)

 

 

* Just an example (among many others) shot with CineAlta.

 

Ah, a last one... PS: I would have avoided the word 'everyone' else. It can mean what you can't get because of... I would inquire you even not being an expert: 'lack of understanding'?... :P Or yet, because of your continual quote related to non-native english speaking issues. Or even regarding what everyone else can do better than me... tstststs :-( It doesn't fit well, I wouldn't say to you :lol: but, to anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Your old trick is already known, as well your agenda. Are your ideas worth money? Or anything else beyond your hateful rants against Jim Jannard and his products or supporters for two (!) years, Keith 'Jim Murdoch' Walters ?

 

Careful, Emmanuel. When you get excited you start blundering into Plain English again :lol:

 

I know Jim Murdoch's old account has my name in it in the personal profile. But he didn't put that there and neither did I. Someone hacked into our email accounts and presumably used those to get into our cinematography.com accounts by requesting new passwords. Whoever it was put in my personal details, stolen out of my gmail account. I was able to recover my gmail and cinematography.com accounts, he was not so fortunate.

 

Meanwhile somebody made a bogus and totally ridiculous post here, using Murdoch's account where "I" supposedly apologize to a variety of people for my hurtful remarks. The thread was immediately removed by the moderators here, but not before I got a copy of it.

 

The style in it is written is VERY interesting, as is some of the information in it, which could NOT have come out of my email account. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Careful, Emmanuel. When you get excited you start blundering into Plain English again :lol:

 

I know Jim Murdoch's old account has my name in it in the personal profile. But he didn't put that there and neither did I. Someone hacked into our email accounts and presumably used those to get into our cinematography.com accounts by requesting new passwords. Whoever it was put in my personal details, stolen out of my gmail account. I was able to recover my gmail and cinematography.com accounts, he was not so fortunate.

 

Meanwhile somebody made a bogus and totally ridiculous post here, using Murdoch's account where "I" supposedly apologize to a variety of people for my hurtful remarks. The thread was immediately removed by the moderators here, but not before I got a copy of it.

 

The style in it is written is VERY interesting, as is some of the information in it, which could NOT have come out of my email account. :rolleyes:

You've extended your credits. Very well. Apart the typo (what could else be?), the twist comes in. And in helpful time of need. ;) Instead bashing Jannard (but you should know better than anyone else why you're going there), you should test your skills on screenwriting. But not only in your native english. :lol: Good try anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
You've extended your credits. Very well. Apart the typo (what could else be?), the twist comes in. And in helpful time of need. ;) Instead bashing Jannard (but you should know better than anyone else why you're going there), you should test your skills on screenwriting. But not only in your native english. :lol: Good try anyway.

Tha-a-a-a- t's better! I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say in that post. Now don't let me catch you slipping up like that again :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Careful, Emmanuel. When you get excited you start blundering into Plain English again :lol:

 

I know Jim Murdoch's old account has my name in it in the personal profile. But he didn't put that there and neither did I. Someone hacked into our email accounts and presumably used those to get into our cinematography.com accounts by requesting new passwords. Whoever it was put in my personal details, stolen out of my gmail account. I was able to recover my gmail and cinematography.com accounts, he was not so fortunate.

 

Meanwhile somebody made a bogus and totally ridiculous post here, using Murdoch's account where "I" supposedly apologize to a variety of people for my hurtful remarks. The thread was immediately removed by the moderators here, but not before I got a copy of it.

 

The style in it is written is VERY interesting, as is some of the information in it, which could NOT have come out of my email account. :rolleyes:

 

Now who is talking gibberish?

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Mr Jannard just out of interest do you have any idea what this Emmanuel Guedes is talking about most of the time ?

Do you want to test my tolerance vs. your lack of understanding? Or is it lacking anything else out there? :lol:

 

I wouldn't say that's always a shame to check out the same names popping up whenever God talks... But on this? Your hates (and usual typos), Mr. Jim Murdoch & Co? No doubts. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

help me out here: is Emanuel A Guedes really Jim Jannard? i'm so confused...

Now you're killing me... :lol: Granted the personal attacks already suffered over these pages only for my RED advocacy as regular customer and loyal early adopter since day one, yeah, it could be. Yet seriously, and just for your information, it's not. You can trace me at reduser.net, as well:

 

http://www.reduser.net/forum/member.php?u=197

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Err... what's this all about?

I'm assuming it's just down the pub banter after a few pints.

(obviously seconding the motion... (To) argue implies presenting one's motivations, not discussing who is the better cybernetic 'artist' to deal with the native english)

Is there a subject matter out here: 2 hrs of 4K video on a 2-layer DVD?... So be on topic for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Forum Sponsors

Metropolis Post

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Film Gears

CINELEASE

BOKEH RENTALS

CineLab

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...