Jujube/pixels: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
But what do we really mean by sharp? | But what do we really mean by sharp? | ||
There is sharpness at the focal point, which requires understanding of the mechanisms of photography. | # There is sharpness at the focal point, which requires understanding of the mechanisms of photography. Eg. the exposure triangle (or tricycle, as some refer to it)[https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/6598/what-is-the-exposure-triangle] | ||
# There is sharpness by display. Eg. retina display. | |||
# Then there is sharpness by perception. | |||
Below is an investigation on #2 and the relationship between #2 and #3, focused on digital production and dissemination. | |||
Below is an investigation on the | |||
I am writing it out simply because I sense a data inflation among all the screens that surround us, and I'd like to do some calculations to prove my hypothesis. | I am writing it out simply because I sense a data inflation among all the screens that surround us, and I'd like to do some calculations to prove my hypothesis. | ||
Line 52: | Line 50: | ||
something | something | ||
== What Are Screens doing to Us == | |||
https://www.wired.com/story/failing-vision-screens-blindness/?mbid=nl_daily_welcome |
Revision as of 20:25, 22 September 2018
Pixels and Perception
Sharpness has become a mainstream aesthetic. It's not unusual to hear rhetorics such as "it's between a sharp image and a missed opportunity."
But what do we really mean by sharp?
- There is sharpness at the focal point, which requires understanding of the mechanisms of photography. Eg. the exposure triangle (or tricycle, as some refer to it)[1]
- There is sharpness by display. Eg. retina display.
- Then there is sharpness by perception.
Below is an investigation on #2 and the relationship between #2 and #3, focused on digital production and dissemination.
I am writing it out simply because I sense a data inflation among all the screens that surround us, and I'd like to do some calculations to prove my hypothesis.
Image as Data
In the broadest strokes and from my current understanding, three things affect digital sharpness:
- the photosensor determines the capacity of maximum data input
- the image quality (a setting on the camera) regulates the actual data stored
- the display/physical medium that outputs the image (to be perceived by a human)
A digital Input to a digital Output interests me the most because of its potential to show how the sharpness we think we are seeing might be something quite simple. We might be able to rethink about sharpness and the tools we use to produce it.
Photosensor
This actual size of the 5D Mark III sensor is 36mm x 24 mm.
surface area | 864 mm² |
photosites (pixels) | 22,300,000 |
pixel pitch | 6.22 µm |
photosite (pixel) area = pixel pitch² | 38.69 µm² |
pixel density[2] | 2.58 MP/cm² |
Pixel pitch tells you the distance from the center of one photosite(pixel) to the center of the next. The larger the photosite, the more light it can capture and the more information can be recorded. Pixel density tells you how many million pixels fit or would fit in one square cm of the sensor.[3]
Image Quality
something
Display
something
What Are Screens doing to Us
https://www.wired.com/story/failing-vision-screens-blindness/?mbid=nl_daily_welcome