• 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 / Removing the delta modulation component from Sony raw compression

Removing the delta modulation component from Sony raw compression

February 16, 2014 JimK Leave a Comment

Someone expressed interest is seeing how the Sony tone compression/expansion simulation would work with our test image if the delta modulation component were removed, leaving us with only the 13-to-11-bit tone compression and its 11-to-13-bit counterpart.

I’m glad to oblige.

Here’s the target image in Adobe RGB:

SonyComTest

Here’s what it looks like in Adobe RGB after conversion to linear, 100% fill factor sampling with an RGGB Bayer color filter array, 14-bit linear quantization, and bilinear interpolation demosaicing:

Sony 13 bit

And here’s the file companded by the Sony compression algorithm and demosaiced in same way, subtracted in a linear color space with Adobe RGB primaries, scaled into the range [0,1], and converted to regular gamma=2.2 Adobe RGB. The scale factor in linear space is 0.0626, meaning that the error artifacts span a range of about 6% of the range of tines in the image. The scale factor is 0.0036, meaning that the range of the error image is 0.4% of the range of the input image. The flat middle gray regions are places where there is negligible error:

sony wo delta gray0036

There’s a moire, but it’s way down there; remember the 10-stop push. Also, note that there’s a moire in the difference image; that doesn’t necessarily mean that there’s a visible moire in the compressed image.

Now, what about photon noise? Here’s the target in Adobe RGB with photon noise added assuming the camera is set to ISO 100:

Sony 13 bit ISO 100

And here’s the file companded by the Sony compression algorithm and demosaiced in same way, subtracted in a linear color space with Adobe RGB primaries, scaled into the range [0,1], and converted to regular gamma=2.2 Adobe RGB. The scale factor in linear space is 0.0626, meaning that the error artifacts span a range of about 6% of the range of tines in the image. The scale factor is 0.0038, meaning that the range of the error image is 0.4% of the range of the input image. The flat middle gray regions are places where there is negligible error:

sony wo delta photon ISO 100 gray0038

The photon noise is enough to obscure the moire.

The Last Word

← Simulating Sony raw compression with photon noise Speculating on Sony’s raw compression →

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 How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • Štěpán Kaňa on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Štěpán Kaňa on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.