Vertical Smear: sounds like the worst skiing accident ever.

Andre De Clercq · August 15th, 2003, 01:47 PM

Of course Lee, reducing the amount of light falling on a CCD will allways reduce smear effects, but this is not allways possible if the rest of the scene has to remain visible... But I don't see real vertical smear on yr images, being a vertical line from top to bottom. I think you are just confusing vertical smear and optical diffraction. Diffraction effects occur with strong point sources (sun) and high F-numbers. Setting a higher shutter speed and open the aperture will reduce diffraction. (FYI the 45degree diffraction rays mean that yr cam has a 45 degree/4 blade diafragm system)

Young Lee · August 15th, 2003, 02:33 PM

Did I mention "vertical" smear on the first pics? :?

BTW, it' not very obvious but you can find the faint vertical line in the second set of the pics. :)

P.S. Thank you for the tip on the 45 degree/4 blade diafragm system. :)

Young Lee · August 15th, 2003, 02:57 PM

How about this pic? "Vertical" smear and X mark. :)

http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...c/IMGA0152.JPG

Andre De Clercq · August 15th, 2003, 03:06 PM

Agree Lee, you only mention a "vertical line" in yr second post which is known in the cam world as "vertical smear" and because the whole thread is about (and started about) vertical smear I just "interpreted" your statement. And yes, like Vladmir wrote in his first post I can see "a modest amount of smear" meaning a faint vertical line (=vertical smear) in the first pic.

Andre De Clercq · August 15th, 2003, 03:20 PM

Vertical smear and diffraction effects can come together...their origin is totally different. For optical diffraction effects see (6 blade diafragm) http://www.ferrario.com/ruether/diffraction.htm

Young Lee · August 15th, 2003, 07:04 PM

Thank you. :)

Tommy Haupfear · August 22nd, 2003, 06:41 AM

I have created the "vertical smear" but it has never prevented me from obtaining a shot.

Some 16:9 frame grabs from my PDX10

http://www.villagephotos.com/pubbrow...elected=441334

I think low light is a much bigger issue than vertical smear. I shot a wedding on Tuesday of this week with my PDX10 and VX2000 and even though I haven't reviewed the footage I can already tell that I'm going to be none too happy with the PDX10 in the very dim lighting.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

August 15th, 2003, 01:47 PM	#31
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Of course Lee, reducing the amount of light falling on a CCD will allways reduce smear effects, but this is not allways possible if the rest of the scene has to remain visible... But I don't see real vertical smear on yr images, being a vertical line from top to bottom. I think you are just confusing vertical smear and optical diffraction. Diffraction effects occur with strong point sources (sun) and high F-numbers. Setting a higher shutter speed and open the aperture will reduce diffraction. (FYI the 45degree diffraction rays mean that yr cam has a 45 degree/4 blade diafragm system)

August 15th, 2003, 02:33 PM	#32
Young Lee Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 268	Did I mention "vertical" smear on the first pics? :? BTW, it' not very obvious but you can find the faint vertical line in the second set of the pics. :) P.S. Thank you for the tip on the 45 degree/4 blade diafragm system. :)

August 15th, 2003, 02:57 PM	#33
Young Lee Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 268	How about this pic? "Vertical" smear and X mark. :) http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...c/IMGA0152.JPG

August 15th, 2003, 03:06 PM	#34
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Agree Lee, you only mention a "vertical line" in yr second post which is known in the cam world as "vertical smear" and because the whole thread is about (and started about) vertical smear I just "interpreted" your statement. And yes, like Vladmir wrote in his first post I can see "a modest amount of smear" meaning a faint vertical line (=vertical smear) in the first pic.

August 15th, 2003, 03:20 PM	#35
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Vertical smear and diffraction effects can come together...their origin is totally different. For optical diffraction effects see (6 blade diafragm) http://www.ferrario.com/ruether/diffraction.htm

August 15th, 2003, 07:04 PM	#36
Young Lee Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 268	Thank you. :)

August 22nd, 2003, 06:41 AM	#37
Tommy Haupfear Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 1,415	I have created the "vertical smear" but it has never prevented me from obtaining a shot. Some 16:9 frame grabs from my PDX10 http://www.villagephotos.com/pubbrow...elected=441334 I think low light is a much bigger issue than vertical smear. I shot a wedding on Tuesday of this week with my PDX10 and VX2000 and even though I haven't reviewed the footage I can already tell that I'm going to be none too happy with the PDX10 in the very dim lighting.