Mike P.
Well-known member
The green channel does have twice as many pixels, which could be twice as "accurate/sensitive" compared to the r and b channels, which (when compared to green) would have "aliasing" perceived as additional sharpness.
Blue could be softer than red merely because of how much tighter/inaccurate/harder-to-read the wavelength is, which are inherently weaker on CMOS as a result. And since red has slow and fat wavelengths, they get read nice and thick.
...That said, all CMOS have this, so it'd be interesting to know how Arri are compensating (assuming that is what's happening). Conversely, it'd be rad to be able to squash this with software as it'd make perceptively sharper images...
Too bad they didn't have MX to compare as well.
NOTE: Take everything I've written with a large helping of salt. Nothing but the best Backyard Science/Hypothesis in this post.
Blue could be softer than red merely because of how much tighter/inaccurate/harder-to-read the wavelength is, which are inherently weaker on CMOS as a result. And since red has slow and fat wavelengths, they get read nice and thick.
...That said, all CMOS have this, so it'd be interesting to know how Arri are compensating (assuming that is what's happening). Conversely, it'd be rad to be able to squash this with software as it'd make perceptively sharper images...
Too bad they didn't have MX to compare as well.
NOTE: Take everything I've written with a large helping of salt. Nothing but the best Backyard Science/Hypothesis in this post.