h a l f b a k e r y"My only concern is that it wouldn't work, which I see as a problem."
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Eyes (and their associated nervous systema) are wonderful things. For example: the blind spot, corneal surface imperfections, and other defects (damaged retina, 'floaters') simply don't show up in what you see.
I have an expensive digital camera that has a minor scratch/flaw in the lens/ccd. This
shows up in every photo I take, but rather than paying for a repair, I just correct it out with my PC software, which marks the flaw and interpolates the data.
So, it just occurred to me that the camera should be able to do this itself. If it detects dirt or a scratch in several consecutive frames, it should correct out the error - until it detects that the physical imperfection has been fixed.
[link]
|
| |
Seems reasonable... if not the camera, then associated software could do it. |
|
| |
I have a 'floater' that does appear in my vision. I have gotten so used to it that I don't see it anymore unless I "look" for it. |
|
| |
you can only *will* a floater down so far before it returns to base. I think they are on some sort of bungee apparatus. |
|
| |
Beware the spicy buffalo wing floater.
|
|
| |
//you can only *will* a floater down so far before it returns to base. I think they are on some sort of bungee apparatus.// |
|
| |
I believe it's because it is suspended in the vitreous humor. Unless it is exactly in line with the fovea and lens, the eye will try to track it. |
|
| |
//Reminds me of Hubble.// It's different because it's not correcting for distortion, it's correcting for dammage and dirt, which are more common problems. Also, AFAIK, error correction of this type is not offered in retail cameras. |
|
| |
One difficulty is that a scratch in a lens won't appear exactly the same in every photograph. Indeed, it's quite possible to have a lens defect which won't be noticeable when photographing objects that are in focus, but which will make out-of-focus objects look odd. Since I don't think a camera's likely to 'know' what a scene is supposed to look like, I wouldn't it to know what corrections to make. |
|
| |