Timeline for Why do cameras use a single exposure rather than integrating across many very quick reads?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2017 at 9:30 | comment | added | Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen | The Sony RX100 can apparently read the sensor 1000 times a second. | |
| Apr 28, 2014 at 21:19 | comment | added | supercat | @jrista: If one had a sensor which could instantaneously copy its integrated readings to an integrated readout register and zero them, while having almost no time at which the sensor was not sensitive to light, combining multiple short exposures could be better than using a single long-duration exposure (among other things, it would allow much greater flexibility in post). The biggest problem is the dead time between exposures when using present technologies. | |
| Jan 24, 2013 at 4:46 | comment | added | jrista | ...to flash at the end of the frame with second-curtain sync to highlight the subject, while leaving a blurry motion trail behind them. You might be able to achieve something sort of like a long exposure by superimposing and doing some kind of advanced post-processing...but I doubt the results would look nearly as good as an actual long exposure with a flash pulse at the end. | |
| Jan 24, 2013 at 4:45 | comment | added | jrista | @wiso: No, you can't superimpose fast frames that entirely freeze motion to create the apparent sense of motion. If we take a waterfall as an example, freezing the waterfall motion at a high speed captures a lot of detail. Superimposing multiple images might increase the amount of "detail noise" in the waterfall itself, but you will never be able to create that soft flowing water effect...you quite explicitly need the shutter to be open for a longer duration of time to achieve that. The baseball player would be similar. Superimposing multiple shots won't so it, especially if you want... | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 22:03 | comment | added | mattdm | And when combined with light field rendering, you can choose depth of field after the fact too. | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 21:58 | comment | added | Ruggero Turra | @MattGrum: so with the Canon 1DX sensor this technique could be interesting for example when shooting a city in the night. In this way I can integrate 100 frames for the sky and 10 for the city (just an example) | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 21:49 | comment | added | Ruggero Turra | @jrista: you can reach the same effect superimposing many fast frames. | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 21:16 | comment | added | jrista | There are also artistic reasons to leave the shutter open for a long time, such as to soften water, blur the motion of a baseball player running for a base, etc. | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 12:29 | comment | added | Matt Grum | @wiso Normal cameras are able to record 25fps video by subsampling the sensor. The best readout->process speed for the whole sensor is the 18MP Canon 1DX which can do 1/14s in JPEG and 1/12s RAW. | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 9:33 | comment | added | Ruggero Turra | what is the present read-out speed? 1 s, 0.1 s, ... ? Since normal cameras are able to record 25fps video I would say ~0.04s. It seems too slow for normal photos. | |
| Jan 23, 2013 at 1:24 | history | answered | Itai | CC BY-SA 3.0 |