Re: Image processing engines in digital cameras


<aniramca@xxxxxxxxx> schreef in bericht news:1180887056.382509.236060@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I wonder of anyone can provide discussion (which may end up to be
technical) on the various image processing engines for some digital
cameras. The Canon has the Digic III, the Lumix has Venus III, and the
Sony has Bionz engine. What about for Nikon cameras? I know that a
photo is created by the imagination of the photographer. How good the
photo is, depends on the photographer. In digital cameras, the camera
manufacturers has image processing system that they use to capture the
image in their cameras. How good the system is, depends on how
superior the algorithms, the processing, options, the image processor
itself (CMOS, CCD, etc), etc.
My question is about the Digic III, Bionz and Venus III (as well as
the Nikon's unknown name engine). Are one of them better or superior
than others... or just a matter of taste or preferences?.
Thanks for discussion.


"All processors are the same"
The processors are probably designed in such a way that they can
all do what the other processors can do. The algoritm used by a
Digic III can probably be implemented on all the others and
vice versa.
"All processors are differently optimized"
The difference is in the actual algoritms implemented on the
processors, the speed at which the algoritms are processed,
and powerconsumption.

"The internals are secret"
Allthough in PR brochures offten a lot off claimes are made
about the superiority of their cameras, since the electronics
have been introduced, manufacturers have never in detail
explained their workings or algoritms. This was allready the
case with analogue camera's where allgoritms for example
for matrix metering or flash metering was not explained.
But some of the 'internal' workings could be deduced from
results. With the digital camera this is even more so.

"The processors of digi camera's"
There is not to much information in the public domain about these
processors. Compared to desktop systems, these processors
hardly consume any energy. Probably are not very good for
general purpose processing. But they do a very (and I mean an
extremely very) good job processing the pictures. The processor
can process a few pictures each second (for example compressing
in Jpeg). Where on a desktop this speed sometimes is not
reached. This is offcourse it is a dedicated machine, but it
is very impressive, that it does beat a modern desk based
processor in some tasks.

"Some guesses about processor workings"
The processor of a D70 is very fast for processing the pictures
in full size, it is even faster if the pictures are reduced to the
smallest size. But the processor is slow when the medium size
is used. This is very probably caused by the fact that full size
does not need any 'interpolation', allthough a color interpolation
is still needed. In the smallest size it can just bundle up pixels.
But in the medium size a complex algoritm has to be used to
interpolate the pixels and therefore is a lot slower.
(This can be seen in the number of pictures the camera can
take in burst for each of the sizes. This is less for the medium
sized pictures).
Doing the same operation on a desktop PC, going from
full size to medium size takes far longer than the same
in camera processing. (For jpeg all adjustments are also made
at the same time).

For going from the largest size picture to the medium size picture
the algoritm is not to simple. There are quite some complex
steps. I am wondering how the processor is optimised for this
type off operation.

"Interesting or off no consequence"
And allthough not directly interesting to a lot of photographers,
I think it is valid to have interest in these aspects. You do not
have to know the technical workings of a camera to make
excelent pictures. But very often the knowing of the workings
of the camera, can help. For example do not use medium
sizes when you want to work as fast as possible.
And one can be interested without wanting to 'use' the information.

It is therefore a pitty that the manufacturers do not share this
information.

"Impressing"
I am very impressed with the processing power the incamera
processor does deliver, given the time constraints, power
constraints and the size constraints the exist within the camera.
This goes for even cheap digital camera's and Dslr's as well.


ben

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Best Camera [Setting] for Concert/Gig/Festival
    ... A shutter speed fast enough to eliminate blur caused by the camera ... an ISO setting on the camera high enough to that allows pictures to ... a camera of sufficient quality that the pictures taken at high ISO ... My guess is your camera *does* let you set ISO and aperture, ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.jazz)
  • Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
    ... I'm not attacking the quality of your ... All I'm saying is that given the same conditions, a dslr is capable of ... You've shown from your own experience as a p&s camera enhusiast. ... at some samples of pictures from the Sony A900 with one of the Carl ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: computer question
    ... with slides, in fact I hardly ever used it for negatives. ... I think I got most of the pictures of family ... buying a new battery for the camera, and since I never expect to use ... no matter at what resolution they're scanned. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: rebel Help Please
    ... I did use a remote release and tripod. ... Flash washes out bad. ... either the camera or the subjects are moving. ... the flash tends to have detrimental effects on colours in the pictures, ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: Best way to image a coin?
    ... Lighting: the more pictures I take, the more I am getting into using ... illuminate the coins without any harshness. ... it's much less of a hassle to set up both the camera AND the lamp than ...
    (rec.collecting.coins)