Patent: Canon 5 Layer UV, IR, RGB Sensor
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
- Status
Meh said:
You can get violet hues either directly from the pigment or by mixing red and blue(additive color mixing is the key word, or two flashlights with gels for experimenting) - your screen does the latter. Nature has a bit of both.
Now look at a picture, preferable a drawing, not a photo, of a rainbow; the colors go red(long wavelength) orange yellow green blue (and now the violet hues the camera mistakes for blue, because the red you'd require to mix the color is so far away it doesn't register on the corresponding sensor cells).
Now you can have two problems: really bad reproduction of some colors, think flowers, minerals and such. And the other occurs if two things have the same color, but use the different ways to get it as described at the start. half the stuff will be properly pink, magenta, violet - but the other renders in blue. Now you can't even explain that this is the way its supposed to be...
Upvote
0
rrcphoto said:
Not likely. IR or UV converted cameras typically filter for just IR or UV in order to get unique images based just on those wavelengths that we can't see. The images are "false color images" with the variation in IR (or UV) mapped back to visible wavelengths. I would suspect that this new 5 layer sensor tech would not be designed to pick up wavelengths too far from visible... rather, just extending slightly into the IR and UV in order to use that information to improve color rendering at the edges and possibly correct better for color shifts and other optical anomalies.
Upvote
0
Lawliet said:
Except that the human eye works in a similar way as an RGB sensor so your eye would make the same "mistake" and therefore it wouldn't be a mistake relative to our vision.
I believe (I'm no expert) the fact that humans perceive a mix of red and blue to be "visible purple" is not the same thing as observing light of a "violet" wavelength. If you look at an object and see it as purple it actually is preferentially reflecting red and blue wavelengths of light. Therefore an RGB sensor would not be confused by that... the blue pixels would register the blue photons and the red pixels would register the red photons just like our eyes do.
Upvote
0
Meh said:
No, sensels seperate wavelengths relatively sharp via filters, while L- cone cells are still somewhat sensitve to short wavelengths; akin to the spectral response of a Foveon sensor.
Take a sample of cobalt violet for example, light reflected of it as no spike in the red band, it absorbs red light about as good as black.
Upvote
0
Nobody's brought it up so I'll mention it. Isn't the timing on this interesting in that Canon just released a new version of DPP that isn't backwards compatible? Maybe the new RAW formula is already in the software?
Upvote
0
Lawliet said:
Technically true, the response curves of our cone cells do not have sharp cut-offs but please define "somewhat sensitive to short wavelengths"... if by that you mean "close to zero" then you are right. If you observe short wavelength light your L cones register a tiny response but the response in the S cone would be orders of magnitude higher and your brain would register that as blue light. Similarly incident light that is green would cause a response in all cones almost equally but your brain knows that is green, rather than white because of the relative responses to blue and red components.
Our brains have to be more complex to deal with the overlap and larger range of response patterns but that still does not mean our eyes, or a sensor, would be confused by UV light.... your eye simply will not see UV light as purple... our visual perception of "visible purple" is NOT the observation of near UV light.
Upvote
0
keithcooper
Canon Rumors Premium
I was referring to there being no details of the internal structure of the light sensitive regions, or positions of wiring interconnects and the like.Meh said:
Compare it, for example, to the Canon patent drawing I linked earlier. This one is very much a block diagram - although I like the assorted boxes and stuff on the underside, to suggest a BSI sensor...
Upvote
0
Canon Rumors said:
New Patent here new Sensor there
New Patent here new Sensor there
New Patent here new Sensor there
Canon it is time to give us a camera(s) with this new technologies, let us testing how good it is ;D
Upvote
0
Hmm someone on another site showed a different version where they show faces and stuff that makes it more clear.
Oh I think I get it now, actually kinda disappointing. This reminds me of the Nikon Scanners with Infrared ICE technology to help remove dirt and dust and such. The fact they talk about skin and wrinkles and blemishes makes me think they want to grab some UV and IR and use it as a sort of auto skin specialized fine bump/wrinkle/blemish remover. Maybe helpful for particular types of portraits, but nothing of any use for anyone else at I'd think. Actually I guess it is sort of different than IR ICE as here it takes the IR hot spots as the better parts, but using a bit of UV, IR and visible it's the same sort of idea in the grandest scheme of things.
I hope this isn't the big thing that is coming and that they tested a portrait studio the other month.
(unless the regular three foveon-like layers, themselves do wonders when you have the IR and UV stuff shut off or I don't get what they are trying to imply)
Oh I think I get it now, actually kinda disappointing. This reminds me of the Nikon Scanners with Infrared ICE technology to help remove dirt and dust and such. The fact they talk about skin and wrinkles and blemishes makes me think they want to grab some UV and IR and use it as a sort of auto skin specialized fine bump/wrinkle/blemish remover. Maybe helpful for particular types of portraits, but nothing of any use for anyone else at I'd think. Actually I guess it is sort of different than IR ICE as here it takes the IR hot spots as the better parts, but using a bit of UV, IR and visible it's the same sort of idea in the grandest scheme of things.
I hope this isn't the big thing that is coming and that they tested a portrait studio the other month.
(unless the regular three foveon-like layers, themselves do wonders when you have the IR and UV stuff shut off or I don't get what they are trying to imply)
Upvote
0
I guess there could be a large market for helping to automatically clean up skin and complexions a bit these days (with all the selfies and portrait shots and quick snapshots of friends taken these days). For any other purpose though I think this patent is nothing doing and some are reading into it stuff it's not meant for at all I suspect.
There is a chance this is aimed at P&S only, hard to say.
There is a chance this is aimed at P&S only, hard to say.
Upvote
0
Cheryll said:
Hah! I agree. Canon has a lot of really good patents for camera sensors...they just never seem to apply them. I'd love to have a 120mp APS-H that can do 9.5fps...I really wonder why they haven't stuffed that wonder into an actual DSLR and just trounced all the competition.
Upvote
0
Yes, you have the right idea. The original Japanese blog post says that the patent assumes the availability of a 5-channel sensor and focuses on what you can do with the extra information -- namely extracting the blemishes and wrinkles from the UV image and using the IR image to extract where the skin is visible, combining the two pieces of information to do blemish and wrinkle removal without reducing contrast or the feeling of depth (I assume it means that current algorithms remove shadows by accident).LetTheRightLensIn said:
Upvote
0
- Status
