[Leica] RE: Calculations wrong?

[Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>]

At 05:02 PM 10/31/00 -0800, Frank Filippone wrote:
>Erwin, if it is any consolation to you....
>
>I come from the electronis business, in the graphics IC chip area.  Every
>time I use your approach to pixels and photography I get my head bashed in
>as well..... The users of this media are not versed in the nomenclature from
>a scientific perspective.  They learned through a bunch of marketing hype.
>
>Keep up the good work.  I understand you.
>
>Frank Filippone

There are two of us Frank.

I have been in the engineering part of digital imaging for quite a while. I
understand pixel nyquest frequencies, minimum possible pixel size (we are
against the wall on this one,) the fallacy of a single 16 megapixel sensor,
the backend electronics necessary for image capture, PRNU, the problems
with dark current and recording into the toe of the gamma curve, signal to
noise ratio, and about a thousand other important parameters and problems
that are keeping direct pixel photography from surpassing film photography,
for a very long time yet.

Erwin, the folks that read the advertising and news hype and spew vitriol
at you (and probably me as a result of this) are simply ignorant about how
it works and don't want to hear logic, reason, and of course, the clear and
undisputable facts.

Very few of these people actually understand how a silver latent image is
formed, valence, the redox chemistry necessary to convert a latent image
into a silver (or globule) image, and the atomic structures and sizes
involved.

So most of the arguments given by these folks are simply day dreaming
speculation. Many of the so called "experts" are not involved in the
engineering and don't have a clue as to what they are talking about.

But things won't change Erwin. So just keep on telling it like it is. There
are a few of us out here listening to you and agreeing with you.

Jim Brick