Researchers Aim for Single-Pixel Camera

http://www.livescience.com/technolog...gle_pixel.html

I think the future of amateur astro-imagers just got brighter!
Cleardarkskies!
Orion314

In article .com,
orion314 wrote:

http://www.livescience.com/technolog...gle_pixel.html

I think the future of amateur astro-imagers just got brighter!
Cleardarkskies!
Orion314

You should read the entire article. The last paragraph is most
revealing.

-------Quote ---------
In the future, the researchers will try to boost the speed at which
their camera records data in order to capture more pixels for
higher-resolution pictures. So far they can take one snapshot of a
single pixel in a few milliseconds, which can get extrapolated to 3,000
recordings a minute for a 128 by 128 pixel image. They hope to boost
that "by a thousand times in the near future," Kelly said.

So for normal exposures, it takes them 1 minute to create a 128x128
pixel image. If you scale that up to modest cheap DSLR sizes, then a
2048 x 2048 pixel image will take 256 minutes to create. Even the very
first generation of wet plate silver cameras were not that bad.

Also, that camera would be useless for longer exposures, because this
single pixel has to be exposed for x seconds of time to let the image
build up. So a 10 second 2kx2k image would take a minimum of
10*2048*2048 seconds to complete.

Regards..

Milton Aupperle
www.outcastsoft.com

"orion314" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.livescience.com/technolog...gle_pixel.html

I think the future of amateur astro-imagers just got brighter!
Cleardarkskies!
Orion314


For astro-imaging purposes I don't think this will work. From what I read in
the article, the idea is that most (snap-shot) images contain redundant data
and, by using only a small sample of data points, the desired images can be
modeled by smart algorithms. For our purposes we need every bit of the
available data in order to wring the most out of processing. For example,
most astro-photographers who use digital SLR cameras are shooting in raw or
TIFF formats, instead of JPEG. If you shoot in JPEG, the compression
algorithm discards information that cannot be recovered by decompression.

I'm not achieving maximum lucidity here, but I hope this makes sense?

Al

This sounds like a single experimental result explaining a multitude of
theories.


Al wrote:
"orion314" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.livescience.com/technolog...gle_pixel.html

I think the future of amateur astro-imagers just got brighter!
Cleardarkskies!
Orion314


For astro-imaging purposes I don't think this will work. From what I read in
the article, the idea is that most (snap-shot) images contain redundant data
and, by using only a small sample of data points, the desired images can be
modeled by smart algorithms. For our purposes we need every bit of the
available data in order to wring the most out of processing. For example,
most astro-photographers who use digital SLR cameras are shooting in raw or
TIFF formats, instead of JPEG. If you shoot in JPEG, the compression
algorithm discards information that cannot be recovered by decompression.

I'm not achieving maximum lucidity here, but I hope this makes sense?

Al