Cameras and Lenses • Hacker News Board

Re: Cameras and Lenses

#71

Post by arriu » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 1:53 PM UTC

lm28469 wrote: post #34

FYI there are digital sensors which aren't using bayer filters. Some are classic sensors missing the bayer filter (leica monochrome for example) other are based on different tech like Foveon sensors [0] Many people also debayer their cameras themselves, especially in astro photography [1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor [1] https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/166334-debayering-a-dslrs...

While the mod is interesting and a way to get into monochrome photography, it should be noted that the mod has disadvantages. Mainly, you end up removing the microlenses. Which seems to cancel out any gains unfortunately.

source: I've done this mod on a couple cameras and wouldn't recommend it for performance gains alone. It's a fun project, not much more.

Re: Cameras and Lenses

#72

Post by arendtio » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 1:57 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #8

Jaruzel wrote: post #7

Although I knew most of technical aspect described having immersed myself in Photography several years ago, I cannot express properly how GOOD this article is. The sliders and diagrams are brilliant for helping a layperson understand how it all works. Kudos!

You'd like their other work : https://ciechanow.ski/lights-and-shadows/ https://ciechanow.ski/gears/ https://ciechanow.ski/tesseract/ Etc. Check out the whole blog! It's amazing. These are some of the most intuitive explanations coupled with the slickest animation / demo work I've ever seen. All of that put together into crystal clear educational material is such a rare gem and requires incredible talent. Impressive…

Added the blog to my Thunderbird RSS-Feeds :-)

Re: Cameras and Lenses

#73

Post by krosaen » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:01 PM UTC

Looking at the page source I'm doubly impressed there seems to be no use of third party libraries. I personally happily use three.js, but still, wow.

https://ciechanow.ski/js/base.js https://ciechanow.ski/js/lenses.js

Re: Cameras and Lenses

#74

Post by dTal » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:08 PM UTC

ehejsbbejsk wrote: post #38

As a hobby photographer, this is simply amazing and the most intuitive article I’ve come across. This is a must read. I am curious, however, why we still can’t digitally reproduce bokeh. Apple is getting close. I thought LiDAR would theoretically solve that and could yield indistinguishable renders compared to analog lenses. That would be a game changer in my view and why I would like to see Apple develop a full-fram…

A large lens captures information over an area, and so to a certain extent can "see around" out of focus objects. A selective blur of a fully focused scene captured from a single viewpoint (i.e. a small lens) can only approximate this effect, because it simply doesn't have access to the same information. Even with a perfect depth map, you still don't know what's behind occluded objects.

Re: Cameras and Lenses

#75

Post by echelon » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:11 PM UTC

h_spacer wrote: post #58

smnscu wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm Romanian and have many Polish friends. This is not even remotely accurate, except for basket cases that I have yet to meet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_name_suffixes Hope that helps.

I'm still going to use they/them because a name doesn't necessarily match with one's gender.

Re: Cameras and Lenses

#76

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:14 PM UTC

dandare wrote: post #25

It may not seem interesting at first, but I am intrigued by how they managed to draw the overlapping blades of the IRIS. > In real camera lenses an adjustable aperture is often constructed from a set of overlapping blades that constitute an iris. If you naively create 6 blades and rotate them around the pivot (the tiny screw), they will never overlap EACH OTHER. One will end up at the very top, and one at the very bo…

[deleted]

Re: Cameras and Lenses

#77

Post by jmenter » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:16 PM UTC

This article is just superb.

Re: Cameras and Lenses

#78

Post by h_spacer » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:27 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #75

h_spacer wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_name_suffixes Hope that helps.

I'm still going to use they/them because a name doesn't necessarily match with one's gender.

Sorry to hear that you hold other cultures in such low regard.

Re: Cameras and Lenses

#79

Post by echelon » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:30 PM UTC

kepler1 wrote: post #20

The site is the work of a guy, "him", and "his" work. We don't have to guess and say "them" and "their" work.

> The site is the work of a guy, "him", and "his" work. We don't have to guess and say "them" and "their" work.

Assumptions are presumptuous and harmful. Everyone is a they/them until otherwise stated. These are extremely useful pronouns.

You're a they/them.

Calm down. You seem to be overly attached to regressive labels. I don't know what drives this in you, but the universe is burning and people just want to be happy. Your life is short; you're going to die and rot away. Is this really something to get worked up over?

In the future, when our descendants are all uploaded to computers or replaced by an AI overlord, people will be all sorts of genders. They won't be bound by yesterday's norms. Would you be a stuffy gender policeperson, or will you just let people be who they are?

Re: Cameras and Lenses

#80

Post by Kye » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:37 PM UTC

kepler1 wrote: post #20

The site is the work of a guy, "him", and "his" work. We don't have to guess and say "them" and "their" work.

I don't see mention of pronouns anywhere. Usually when people don't list pronouns or hints it's because they haven't thought about it or don't care. Without any comment from him, you have no place telling others how to refer to him.

I'm going by the photo on his Twitter account, but it's as valid a guess as any other. If you went by how I look or by my legal name, you would be wrong, and I would be annoyed at someone on a website chastising others for not using what they assumed was correct.