Digital BW, The Print

>>>>>>> You are also confused by pixels vs sensors.  Digital imaging sensors use
>> 
>>>>>>> FOUR sensor cells to make ONE color pixel...so if you want to get the
>> same
>>>> 
>>>>>>> amount of color information, you need four times the amount of sensors!
>>>> So,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 4 x 22.1 is reasonably close to my claim of 100M pixels.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Question: I assume this is only true for one shot cameras, but not the 4
>>>>>> shot models, a la Leaf and Sinar?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Just curious.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Todd
>>>>> 
>>>>> If you are referring to the 'scanning backs' yes, that is how they get
>>>> around
>>>>> that sensor/pixel problem.  But, as I understand it, those cameras are not
>> 
>>>> as
>>>>> versatile because of the time it takes to scan.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Harvey Ferdschneider
>>>> 
>>>> No, I'm referring to 4 shot backs, which make 4 separate exposures per
>>>> capture, one for each color. This eliminates color interpolation. These are
>> 
>>>> for still-lifes primarily, for the obvious reason that movement between
>>>> exposures is a problem.
>>>> 
>>>> One difference between (among many) 4shot backs and scan backs is that scan
>> 
>>>> backs need continuous light sources, ie, tungsten, HMI, florescent, etc,
>>>> while 4 shot backs can also utilize strobe.
>>>> 
>>>> Todd
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I assume it's the same concept and same limitations.
>>> 
>>> Harvey Ferdschneider
>> 
>> Who's concepts and limitations of what?
>> 
>> Todd
> 
> The concept of increasing the real pixel count by doing 4 exposures (one with
> each of the RGGB filters).  And limitations, in that one cannot do 'live'
> subjects, as they move (including most landscapes) and would not ''register'
> in
> the sequential exposures.
> 
> Harvey Ferdschneider

Okay. See what I'm wondering is with 4 shot backs whether the pixel count
really increases, or if the pixel information is just more accurate, ie
captured not interpolated? If pixel count doesn't increase, wouldn't it also
hold true that with the one shot backs, when used for grayscale images, the
pixel count doesn't quarter.

IOW, pixel count (resolution) is independent from color info. You and Austin
have maintained that a 6 megapix camera would only give you one quarter of
that many pixels in grayscale mode (correct me if I'm wrong). I am
questioning that. I'm suggesting that that *IS* the resolution of those
cameras, and the file sizes get larger from there as the color information
gets added on top of that. IOW, a 6 megapix camera may yield an 18MB RGB
TIFF. You don't get 18MB of resolution, but you do get 6 megapixels of
resolution.

So, if you go back to the top of this message, where I came in, Austin says
for RGB you need four times as many sensors, I'm asking if that is true with
4 shot devices, or do the separate exposures work as, or in lieu of, extra
sensors.

Let me say that I don't know what I suggest to be so, I'm putting that
argument/question out there somewhat generically. I need Austin to do the
math... ;-)

Todd