Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Canon 7D Zone Plate Shots

Cropped sensor... have a look at the CML zoneplates and divide them into 4.

Skipped...

True. But probably something like the Canon shots... Well... Not to offend Jim and Graeme... sorta slightly in the direction of the Canon ones.

And I do think I get the point. 120 fps from full sensor would be lovely. Even @ 2k.

That's sorta an Epic Challenge
 
Patrick Tresch said:
Yes I did. But It's about RED and not other wendors.

I never saw zone plates of Red One with skipped line in 2k (1/4th resolution) VS Red One with cropped sensor to 2k... Did you?

Pat
Click to expand...

Pat, sorry, I was not laughing at you, but rather the mere idea of suggesting skipped lines after the horror we have seen from Canon's line skipping. I was more laughing at the reaction you were likely to receive!

In the past Graeme and Jim have talked about the fact that they tried various kinds of binning (sRAW style) and possibly line skipping, and the results were not good.

But maybe Graeme can discuss why Mysterium line skipping would be good or bad in more detail.
 
I did try a number of things. No more detail I'm afraid Tom.

Graeme
 
Line-skipping is not good under any circumstances. The only reason to do it is to get a slow sensor to "speed up". The DSLR sensors are not designed with a true clock speed to do 24/25/30 fps... let alone higher frame rates. That is the reason to line-skip... pretend you can. Some people can live with the lower resolution, moire and aliasing. We can't.

Jim
 
good one Jeff.... I was a bit to hung over this morning to think of anything clever, but as a fan of Dean Martin I remembered the line.

I think it would be fun to shoot some history professors in Herringbone suits with both a RED and a 5d2 or 7d.... the results would be so painfully obvious.
 
lmao... maybe canon should license that song for their 7D commercials...

JK!
 
AWESOME!!! Why have I not been informed of such wardrobe before I wrapped my first film???

Think of how easy color-matching would have been..... <sigh...>
 
I learned more about camera technology on this thread then I did my entire college career of Broadcasting. This was much cheaper.
 
Has anyone put the Panasonic HVX through these plate tests? I am curious to discover the HVX's sensor ability in relation to line-skipping - this was the camera of choice at our college.
 
morgan_moore said:
Showing filter removal of a D200 with increase moiree but better detail resolution
Click to expand...

No, what you're seeing is higher contrast at lower spatial frequencies. As far as actual detail (resolution) goes, it's not "better" detail: it's false detail. Personally, I find false detail to be highly displeasing. To me it looks fake and unnatural. The real world doesn't have jagged edges and a grid: it's smooth. Aliasing is like a black cat went past us, and then another that looked just like it. It's a glitch.

morgan_moore said:
This is a demo of why testing with a zone plate MAY be a poor way of understanding how nice (or not) a camera will perform in the real world
Click to expand...

Quite the contrary. The aliasing measured on the zone plate translates in a known and repeatable manner to the real world, that's why it's useful. Before I ever got my 5D2, the zone plate told me that it would make eyeglass frames ripple like a cascading waterfall, distracting the viewer from paying attention to the eyes themselves. And it does.

It told me that the 5D2 will make hair sparkle when it should be matte, red when it should be blond, and jagged when it should be curved. It will affect any and every bit of fine detail in the image. It does.

Some people have a conscious objection to aliasing. For others it's below the surface a little: you can't explain, but you feel it. You've felt it your entire life, that there's something wrong with the image. You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad.

morgan_moore said:
In the zone plate test the filtered D200 looks better but in the real world test the De-Filtered D200 looks better
Click to expand...

In the "real world", the filtered D200 shot would have capture sharpening. What is "real"? How do you define "real"? For one, they did not use capture sharpening (OLPF compensation), probably because they knew that it would exacerbate the nasty artifacts on the unfiltered D200, whereas on the filtered D200 sharpening works great with no artifacts, and cleanly restores the contrast that was muted by the OLPF.

morgan_moore said:
...images that are on occasion bugged by moiree if you photograph something where the pixel pitch matches the repetetive frequency of the subject matter
Click to expand...

If you never shoot patterned detail, you'll never get moire. But moire is not the only aliasing artifacts. There are millions of ways it can affect the image, all of them bad. Unfortunately, no one can be told how bad aliasing is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Aliasing is an artifact, Morgan. That artifact is our enemy. But when you're inside a theater, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. These people are still affected by that aliasing and that ruins their suspension of disbelief. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to realize it's aliasing. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they think they actually like aliasing, and will fight to protect it.

Cameras with aliasing move to an area of stills and motion and multiply and multiply until every natural image is ruined by aliasing and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Aliasing is a disease, a cancer of this planet.

Artifacts are a plague and filters are the cure.
 
Dan

Thanks for a considered response.

I think in the case of the D200 you are wrong about false detail

Basically if you put vaseline all over your lens it gets rid of moiree and softens the image

The test was showing that that was effectively what nikon had done with this camera

Ive been shooting digital stills since the D1 was launched, the four filterless cameras I have owned - Kodak Proback, Kodak SLRn and two 22mp digital backs look better in print than any of the other cameras I have used

(and have had moiree on certain shots)

Are you saying I have been suckered by false detail for all this time ?

Remember all out put is digital anyway - printed blobs on a page or pixels on a computer monitor - all you need to do is outresolve the output medium

Anyway back to the 7D

There is no doubt that the tests are correct and the camera must be used with a full knowledge of its failings

I believe that my kit consisting of an EX1 and a 7d is the best/most versatile kit one can buy for less than $10k and that I should not choose the EX1 for every shot

I would not rate either camera as being true 1080 but the best crack at 1080 in this price margin

The tests are useful to me because it clarifies to me the shots I should do with the EX1

The tests are useful to other people who may think they can offer a 'professional' service based on just DSLR cameras - they cant

Personally Im looking for proper 1080 RAW image capture n a reasonable chip size and will buy the first solution that becomes available

The 7d is toy price, the 1ds4 is not toy price (neither is the D3s) - I would not spend that money on those cameras because they are flawed by..

-Artifacts
Lack of
-Timecode
-XLR sound
-record time
(And Raw capture just like the sony F35!)

Therefore I await REDs developments with great excitement

I did a shoot yesterday on the 7d in the 'real world' which I will post some images from - IMO they look nice - nicer than my my ex1 and possibly nicer than what could have been done on Red - it was a lowlight RnG situation

S
 
'Real World'

These images are flawed expecially the moireed one which I picked for fairness, but what else could I have shot them on for less than $10k

I feel the client will be happy and they will look cool on whatever they watch them on - which wont be a cinema

We see I am
- sharpening in camera
- choosing lens/composition that work with the camera

with the intention of creating a client baffling illusion of quality !

(how do I make those nice popups ??)

1.jpg

2.jpg

3.jpg

4.jpg

5.jpg

From

http://www.vimeo.com/7769606

This was a joy to shoot 7d and 50 1.4nikkor - no assistant, no lights, no script, no bad back, no kit debt .. all reality

S
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top