the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / The Last Word / Adrift in a sea of acronyms

Adrift in a sea of acronyms

December 14, 2014 JimK 3 Comments

A reader sent me a message this morning saying that he is confused by all the acronyms associated with the current set of posts, and asked me to post a glossary that he could keep open as he read the others.

Here goes:

ADC – analog to digital converter

CFA – color filter array

CSV – comma-separated vlaues

dB – decibel; one-tenth of a Bell.

DC – direct current; the zero frequency component in the frequency domain

DN – you won’t see that acronym here; I find it awkward and tautological. I use count or LSB instead, depending on the context

F – spatial frequency

Fs – spatial sampling frequency

FWC – full-well capacity

ISO – I don’t think this actually stands for anything anymore; Possibly it used to, in some language-dependent way, stand for the International Organization for Standardization. Maybe someone can straighten me out. When used to identify film speed, it meant the same thing as ASA, which did indeed stand for the American Standards Organization.

LSB – least significant bit

Mu – mean, or average value

PRNU – photo response nonuniformity

Post-amp RN – read noise that occurs after the camera gain stage

Pre-amp RN – read noise that occurs before the camera gain stage

RN – read noise

ROI – region of interest

Sigma – standard deviation; the square root of the variance

SNR – Signal to noise ratio

TIFF – tagged image file format

The Last Word

← Camera modeling details A test for “ISO-less-ness” →

Comments

  1. Chris Livsey says

    December 15, 2014 at 1:29 pm

    You will love this: The ISO standard ISO 12232:2006 allows, as one of a choice of techniques, the maker of a digital camera to specify EI arbitrarily !!
    The choices are the manufacturer’s opinion of what EI values produce well-exposed sRGB images at the various sensor sensitivity settings.
    What’s that about “not worth the paper it’s written on” ?

    Reply
  2. Abe says

    December 17, 2014 at 2:41 pm

    Typo: PNRU -> PRNU

    ISO is only an output format “standard”, and has nothing whatsoever to do with raw files or image sensors. And Chris commented, the standard allows arbitrary definition of ISO 🙂

    You forgot ADU – if you don’t like DN, then maybe “analog digital unit” or “arbitrary digital unit” doesn’t sound good either 😉

    (I do wish you’d use DN as it’s common terminology in this field…)

    Reply
    • Jim says

      December 17, 2014 at 6:07 pm

      Abe,

      PRNU: fixed, thank you.

      ISO does have something to do with raw files, as it is the name of the control that changes (or doesn’t, sometimes) the gain applied to those files. Aside from that, I agree with you.

      Yep, you’re right; I dislike ADU every bit as much as DN. I’ve worked with digital sampled date systems since 1969. Until I encountered the, IMHO, awkward terminology of sensor analysis, every time an engineer wanted to talk about he raw number coming out of an ADC, he (and, it almost always was a he, in the thirty years that I worked in those fields) say “the count”. There was never any ambiguity or confusion among the listeners. It was simple. It was direct.

      About the common terminology: maybe I’ll come around after I hear “data number” over and over again until I’m completely worn down, but it just grates on me so much now I can’t bear to use the term. Maybe it could be made even more tautological, then just plain DN would look good by comparison. How about “Quantized Digital Representation of Some Physical Phenomenon/Parameter WithOut Reference to Offset or Scale”? QDRSPPWOROS, for short.

      Jim

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

March 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Jan    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • Good 35-70 MF lens
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • Mal Paso on Christmas tree light bokeh with the XCD 38V on the X2D
  • Sebastian on More on tilted adapters
  • JimK on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • Kyle Krug on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • JimK on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time
  • Jake on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time
  • Piotr Chylarecki on Who am I?
  • JimK on Who am I?
  • Piotr Chylarecki on Who am I?
  • Stefan on Swebo TC-1 OOBE

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.