--- On Thu, 8/4/11, Uwe Soltau <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Uwe Soltau <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [AP]HDR
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Thursday, August 4, 2011, 2:35 PM
>
> Lee,
>
> The light sensitivity will be resolved in a different way.
> I am sure you are aware
> of High Dynamic Range (HDR) photography. They will
> apply that principle to Video cameras as well.
> A company (institute) in the UK has developed a prototype
> of such a camera.
> They are recording 21 different exposures of each
> frame!!!!!!!!!
> Those exposures are then processed to give you a perfectly
> exposed picture.
<clip>
> Such a system will obviously need massive storage
> capacities and computing power
> but also that is available at a cost but soon for all of
> you (I will not live long enough).:-)
It wouldn't need any more storage than is normal for HDTV. What it will need is
a very large buffer to temporarily store and process the multiple exposures per
frame and a stinking fast processor to merge/composite each frame so it can be
transferred to storage.
More storage could be added and the processing system reprogrammed to store two
or more of the exposure streams for post-processing outside the camera. I can
see a prosumer camera with an option to record half the time with a "light
range" and a "dark range" stream for some post recording tweaking of the
contrast and brightness.
Costlier cameras would have more and more storage, with options to keep more of
the individual exposure streams, all the way up to units only the big studios
can afford that just store all the raw exposure streams so the editors can have
total control of the look of the image without any post processing loss of any
video data due to application of filters and other effects.
'Course the irony is a system that keeps all the unprocessed exposure streams
would be technically *less sophisticated* than a consumer HDR-HD camcorder that
only has the ability to merge all the exposure streams into a single HDR
recording. The "high end" unit would have 20+ times the storage but not the
compositing/merging processor hardware.
The head end of both a studio system and a prosumer system could be identical.
The difference would be which type of processing and storage system they're
connected to. Such a modular hardware kit is unlikely to be produced because
the manufacturer wouldn't be able to justify charging $10K for the head end for
studios ;) though the studio type store-it-all storage module would be 20+
times the price of the merge-it-all storage module.
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Adobe-Premiere/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Adobe-Premiere/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
