Colin McDonald
August 1st, 2012, 01:28 AM
Below is a quote from a very intense young man on another (non-video related) forum. Having just expressed some opinions on matters within his (student) professional expertise, he then launched off on this tangent relating to broadcast video to support his view that technology had limits in replacing human operators in matters of safety. I can't make head or tail of what followed. Is this all nonsense?
... but if you want an example of silicon strain or fatigue, take a careful look at the video footage from the opening ceremony of the Olympics, a lot of the camera sensors there started suffering fatigue.
If you want one specific shot, look at the one from under the cauldron when it got turned up, the supporting staffs appeared to glow red, they where not glowing red, this was a tired sensor failing to distinguish what should and shouldn't be red and showing flares of deep primary red colour wherever light is flaring over (also an affect of rough treatment on the lens).
Cameras don't like lots of different light, especially CCD type sensors, and APS-C sensors (not used in video I must admit, but CCD devices are used).
(SNIP)
Either way, while thinking of what to write in here, a quick search of google images found these shots.
http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/50132a24ecad049d3800001c/olympic-cauldron-from-the-inside.jpg
That is partly internal lighting and lighting from the flame, but it seems much brighter due to the high amount of bright flame in the shot causing damage to the sensor, this will have been replaced by RED on Saturday or Sunday.
http://www.kilburntimes.co.uk/polopoly_fs/pa_14135069_1_1462691!image/335827143.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_630/335827143.jpg
This is a little more difficult to talk around, but you can see the bright lights of the background being picked out more than the foreground, and if you look carefully (admittedly I was watching it live in 1080p from a satellite so it's more noticeable) you can just notice an overspill of the strong colours onto the whites, the blue on the base of Sir S Redgrave is a fair amount of actual lighting, but a lot of it is lens and sensor disruption and contamination, wish I had the comparison shots from the live show to show you the difference between a fresh and abused camera (they picked up a couple of standby ones throughout the ceremony)
My bold on the bit about commenting on video quality from a satellite.
... but if you want an example of silicon strain or fatigue, take a careful look at the video footage from the opening ceremony of the Olympics, a lot of the camera sensors there started suffering fatigue.
If you want one specific shot, look at the one from under the cauldron when it got turned up, the supporting staffs appeared to glow red, they where not glowing red, this was a tired sensor failing to distinguish what should and shouldn't be red and showing flares of deep primary red colour wherever light is flaring over (also an affect of rough treatment on the lens).
Cameras don't like lots of different light, especially CCD type sensors, and APS-C sensors (not used in video I must admit, but CCD devices are used).
(SNIP)
Either way, while thinking of what to write in here, a quick search of google images found these shots.
http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/50132a24ecad049d3800001c/olympic-cauldron-from-the-inside.jpg
That is partly internal lighting and lighting from the flame, but it seems much brighter due to the high amount of bright flame in the shot causing damage to the sensor, this will have been replaced by RED on Saturday or Sunday.
http://www.kilburntimes.co.uk/polopoly_fs/pa_14135069_1_1462691!image/335827143.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_630/335827143.jpg
This is a little more difficult to talk around, but you can see the bright lights of the background being picked out more than the foreground, and if you look carefully (admittedly I was watching it live in 1080p from a satellite so it's more noticeable) you can just notice an overspill of the strong colours onto the whites, the blue on the base of Sir S Redgrave is a fair amount of actual lighting, but a lot of it is lens and sensor disruption and contamination, wish I had the comparison shots from the live show to show you the difference between a fresh and abused camera (they picked up a couple of standby ones throughout the ceremony)
My bold on the bit about commenting on video quality from a satellite.