# Try putting this through DxOMark..!



## Freshprince08 (Jun 22, 2012)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18536170


----------



## YellowJersey (Jun 25, 2012)

This is similar to an idea I had while in the shower the other day. I wondered if you could develop a camera that could control the exposure of each pixel independently of the rest of the sensor so that literally every single pixel had the perfect exposure. Whether this is even possible is beyond me, as I lack everything but a very rudimentary understanding of this kind of engineering. 

While this isn't quite down to that level, the idea of using a bunch of small cameras to compose the larger image comes surprisingly close to my shower pipe-dream. I believe the GAIA satellite uses multiple sensors, but I'm not sure each one is exposed differently from the rest. *shrugs*


----------



## dr croubie (Jul 10, 2012)

YellowJersey said:


> This is similar to an idea I had while in the shower the other day. I wondered if you could develop a camera that could control the exposure of each pixel independently of the rest of the sensor so that literally every single pixel had the perfect exposure. Whether this is even possible is beyond me, as I lack everything but a very rudimentary understanding of this kind of engineering.



Possible, yes (with enough computing power).
But wouldn't that just end up with a no-contrast picture that looks like an 18% grey-card?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 10, 2012)

Camera manufacturers have been doing R&D on individual control of pixels to achive better DR for years. It is not a simple thing, or maybe its so simple that they do not see it.
The amplification of the outer circumference of pixels is turned up, for example to help counteract light loss to to the angle of incidence with wide aperture lenses. However, its a whole bank of millions that are controlled as a group.
I do not see that controlling a photosite by turning down gain to keep it from over saturating would result in a gray card effect, but it could certainly yield suprising results if not done correctly.


----------



## dr croubie (Jul 10, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The amplification of the outer circumference of pixels is turned up, for example to help counteract light loss to to the angle of incidence with wide aperture lenses. However, its a whole bank of millions that are controlled as a group.



isn't that what this article was all about (that had people complaining that cameras were 'cooking' the raw files)?


----------



## Lawliet (Aug 12, 2012)

YellowJersey said:


> Whether this is even possible is beyond me, as I lack everything but a very rudimentary understanding of this kind of engineering.



Something like that actually exists - instead of counting electrons after a certain time you wait for each pixel to send a "my bin is full"-message. Your timer tells you how intense the illumination was.
On the downside the idea of a defined shutter time goes out of the window, and while low light levels can be recorded almost free of noise fast flash might cause trouble.


----------

