"when it hits well the only comparison is > Ektar 100. Foveon looks alive like film does, a lot of other digital > seem one dimensional. > > Walter > Walter, It's a remarkable effect when it's working. I wonder how much is the sensor and how much is in the firmware?" Hi Charlie & Walter, to chime in blithely based on theoreticals, readings, and no empirical experience! It is my "firm" understanding that the 'benefits' of the Fovenon sensor over the other players to achieve a 'Ektar 100' film like feel is that each color sensing channel is an independent layer (as in film) which is stacked one upon another. This is 'opposed' to the Bayer Filter model in the Nik-Con-Oly et-al paradigm where all the sensor sites are on one plane and the bayer filter divides each site up to determine color. ... huh?... TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST! I can 'understand' the Fovenon explanations I've read because the analogies to film jive with me, but I have yet to make sense of the Bayer Filter concepts. I inevitably chalk it up to 'ok - it works, that's enough' then I move on because it makes my head hurt pondering it. Please enlighten. I have suffered the arrows of blithely chiming in - I slew myself. :-) I also somehow can't help but seeing the Fovenon vs Bayer Filter fight as analogous in some ways to the vhs/beta and the HD DVD/Blu-Ray fights. Circumstances outside of 'best one' determined the winners and losers. R in Mi ________________________________ Nothing is really work unless you would rather be doing something else. - James M. Barrie ________________________________ ________________________________ From: Charlie Falke <chfalke@xxxxxxx> To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thu, April 1, 2010 11:52:47 AM Subject: [LRflex] Re: No subject On 4/1/2010 11:22 AM, Walter Kramer wrote: > Charlie, ------ Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at: http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/ Archives are at: //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/