August 28, 2014, 11:49:49 PM

Author Topic: Just Touching the Surface of Dual Pixel Technology? [CR1]  (Read 8208 times)

rs

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
    • View Profile
Re: Just Touching the Surface of Dual Pixel Technology? [CR1]
« Reply #45 on: November 28, 2013, 03:37:40 PM »
I actually don't understand why this aspect has not yet been discussed - not here, nor an Facebook, but eventually I am just wrong:

If you have phase detection capability on *every* pixel of your sensor, which means for *every* pixel in the final picture, it should be easy to get a 3D image from it.

As I understand phase detection AF, you can actually get the *distance* from just one metering.
Buffer the readout of *ALL* dual pixels, render the image from the light, save a "debth map" document alongside to the image and let the software on a PC render the scene in 3D. Or let the camera do it. There are even 3D capable displays that could be used in camera.

What did I overlook on the technical side?

I think, THIS would be a HUGE step in photography. Although I am completely happy with 2D, but 3D movies and TVs showed us where things could lead us. Then 3D images for everyone were just a logical step.

Any thoughts on this?
http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/smart-camera-camcorder/lenses/special-purpose-lenses/EX-S45ADW

Different way of accomplishing what you're after. Both will suffer from nasty looking half cut bokeh from each of the two images used to make up the stereoscopic image, but they go about achieving the same end result in a different way - one blocks off half the lens, the other blocks off half of each pixel.
5D II | 24-70 II | 70-200 II | 100L | 40 | Sigma 50/1.4 | 40D | 10-22 | 17-55 | 580 EX II | 1.4x TC II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Just Touching the Surface of Dual Pixel Technology? [CR1]
« Reply #45 on: November 28, 2013, 03:37:40 PM »

thome

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Just Touching the Surface of Dual Pixel Technology? [CR1]
« Reply #46 on: December 01, 2013, 02:57:27 PM »
I don't know what you mean by "nasty looking half cut bokeh", but there is a biiig difference in capturing stereoscopic pictures with two "lenses" set apart to get depth information (two different angles, two pictures) and calculating it from a depth map from just one picture. Actually I don't know if the last one will be better, as you would have to have this one picture splitted again for the human eyes into.... different angles. At best from a source that capured both pictures from a "human eyes distance". But for a PC these depth map would be sufficient. But how to get it done for human eyes? Mh. I do know much too less about 3D. ;-)

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4074
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Just Touching the Surface of Dual Pixel Technology? [CR1]
« Reply #47 on: December 02, 2013, 04:49:56 AM »
I'm ready for QPAF (Quad Pixel).
HDR plus AF.
it seems like a natural evolution to me

I'm not sure DPAF or a hypothetical evolution to QPAF is really a means to achieving HDR. Remember, ML had to cut resolution in half in order to achieve its makeshift approach, not because they did not have dual pixels...but because they had to use both the per-pixel amps as well as a secondary downstream amp. Doesn't matter how many times you dice up a pixel...if you have to use the downstream amplifier to achieve ML's style of "HDR", then diced pixels won't help.

Additionally, HDR implies 32-bit float data storage. Current camera ADCs are still limited to 14 bits int. Canon already has 12 stops of DR...seems a bit extreme to use such a convoluted approach to improving that by a mere two stops, when their problem actually lies in the ADCs themselves. Canon could take a far simpler approach...increase the parallelism of the ADCs, and move them closer to the pixels, to reduce the amount of noise they introduce into the signal. That's what everyone else is doing, and it is quite effective.

Assuming Canon was able to use QPAF to do some form of HDR...unless they increase the bit depth of the ADC, it isn't really going to be HDR. You would still be limited to 14 stops of DR, albeit achieved via a rather convoluted apprach that could be more costly and less effective than simply modernizing their read pipeline architecture. To get true HDR, Canon would need to use 32-bit ADC, and use floats rather than ints. At the very least, to improve DR by a meaningful degree, they would need to move to 16-bit integer ADC, however that wouldn't necessarily be "HDR".
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 5D III | Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: SBIG STT-8300M | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Just Touching the Surface of Dual Pixel Technology? [CR1]
« Reply #47 on: December 02, 2013, 04:49:56 AM »