• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

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

You are here: Home / The Last Word / More slit scan experiments — a bit of progress

More slit scan experiments — a bit of progress

November 23, 2016 JimK 2 Comments

This post is part of a series about some experiments I’m doing combining space and time in slit scan photographs. The series starts here.

I’m beginning to get some images I like from the current slit scan series. I am experimenting with running the synthetic slit from right to left as well as the other was around. 

5-slid-fwd-start-1-2px

 

5-slid-fwd-start-2001-3px

 

5-slid-start-rev-8001-3px

 

slid-fwd-1px4

 

slid-rev-start-1-2px

 

5-slid-rev2-start-8001-2px

 

I’m experimenting with varying the synthetic slit width (between 2 and 6 pixels seems to be best) and thus the synthethic scan time, so that the clouds are not completely weird, but don’t look natural, either. 

During the programming to get a slit that I could move both ways, I made an error that produced this:

another-error

 

I thought the symmetry was interesting, and I made me wonder what things would look like If I used two synthetic slits, starting together in the center, and moving to the sides:

5-slid-start-both-8001-2px

 

Except in the center, it’s missing the symmetry, because the clouds are different places at different times. 

Oh, well.

The Last Word

← More slit scan experiments — a bug More slit scan experiments — fun with wind shear →

Comments

  1. Lior says

    November 23, 2016 at 11:23 pm

    Wonderful images!
    Did you consider, instead of simply taking each column from a single image, using a weighted average? At this scale it’s impossible to see, of course, but at 100% it might make the clouds smoother. For example, for 5-pixel slits the weights might be:
    0.8 0.2
    0.6 0.4
    0.4 0.6
    0.2 0.8
    0.0 1.0
    I hope I’m clear…

    Also, I’d be curious to see the results of horizontal slits and radial slits (e.g, take the center pixel from the first image, the pixels in a circle of radius 1 from the second image, the pixels in a circle of radius 2 from the third image, etc.)

    Reply
    • Jim says

      November 24, 2016 at 9:40 am

      Interesting idea about the weighting. Sort of like a slit with one (or two, if I extend the idea) fuzzy edge(s). I’d have to convert the images to floating point, and take out the gamma to do the processing right. After processing, I’d put the gamma back and convert to 16-bit per color plane precision. Done right, I could get some averaging of multiple frames for each column, and thus less noise in the shadows.

      I have the ability to do a horizontal slit already, although I need to rework the code a bit to bring it up to the versatility that I now have with the vertical slit. I hadn’t thought of circular, tangential slit. I don’t think that would work when I’m just picking pixels from images, since there would be jitter in converting a perfect circle to the pixels available, but it could certainly work if I used weighting, as you suggested. I think that would be computationally cheaper than resing up and interpolating to get the pixel values.

      I could do a radial sweep, too, but I think that will just look weird.

      Lotta work ahead.

      But that’s what’s fun.

      Jim

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • 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 35-70 MF 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

  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.