Wade,

I have been in contact with a major manufacture of scanners and someone on
the east coast  ( professor at a college I believe)who has done panoramic
cameras using linear CCD's. It was difficult to get them together. I had
tried to get a free scanner in exchange for an article on how to take it and
modify it for use as a panoramic camera. I did get the company to agree to
give away a scanner but I do not think anything and happed beyond this. This
was about a year ago and I think it flopped.

I think it is a great idea to use linear CCDs for doing digital imaging. I
would like to have a panoramic camera myself but I think it is more
complicated than what might be thought of on first blush. I would still
encourage anyone thinking of this to go forward and I may be able to supply
CCD samples and data sheets. Today there is NO scanner maker in the U.S.
only OEM's. So this means it is hard to get color sensors.

As for small area sensors as in the TI offering. I think it is better to go
to wall mart and buy their $30 digital camera to play with. My issue with
area sensors is that the inexpensive ones are barely of a size to be
interesting and the interesting ones are in cameras that cost $900 so far.
One not only needs the sensor but the chip set  that drives it ( from the
sensor manufacture ) and therefore the PC board design to even begin to
experiment. We do have a few area sensor / digital camera makers in the U.S.
but they are having a hard time of it from a business point of view.


So from where I sit linear sensors , some at the 2400 DPI range over 8.5
inches in width, could offer much improved images over even the present crop
of area sensor cameras at a price of requiring a slow scan time.  They are
also much easier to drive than the area guys.


With respect to flare and artifacts. It is only an issue where there is a
lot of contrast.  The sun can deliver this , a small light inside a scanner
can not. In fact, they have the other problem as they have gone from 8
micron photo diode to 5 micron photodiode to get the resolution up in  a
smaller , cheaper area. This has significantly reduced the amount of photons
that are captured and is the difference between good and OK scanners. the OK
scanners actually have fewer electrons generated by the photosite that the
number of combinations that the A to D converter can deliver.  It is a good
trick to be able to interpolate color values between individual electrons
;<) .


There is also a trend for the Scanner makers to have each sensor custom made
with their own IP on board. This will limit availability of sensors to the
general public outside of buying a scanner itself.


_______________________________________________
Cameramakers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://rmp.opusis.com/mailman/listinfo/cameramakers

Reply via email to