PDA

View Full Version : Document, describing the 8x10 digital back



pjotr
25-Feb-2016, 08:12
hi,

don't know if this has been posted yet: http://www.imagesensors.org/Past%20Workshops/2011%20Workshop/2011%20Papers/R46_Loijens_596cm2.pdf


pjotr

Randy Moe
25-Feb-2016, 08:56
May as well go ULF at 17x17".

Fuji on the hunt.

http://digital-radiology.fujimed.com/flat-panel-detectors/17x17-gos/?gclid=CNyP1_-ik8sCFUk6gQod8FABoA

pjotr
26-Feb-2016, 03:30
do you think, this is the same technology that Largesense (http://www.largesense.com) is using?

p

koraks
26-Feb-2016, 04:19
Probably not. There may be similarities, but the fuji contraption is an xray detector. It doesn't see visible light.

pjotr
27-Feb-2016, 04:48
In the above mentioned document, it is stated that they use a cmos sensor that is being used in x-ray detectors. Don't know about the fuji, but there are digital x-ray detectors consisting of a combination of a light sensitive sensor plus a scintillator that converts x-ray to visible light. You can read about it here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_detector#Scintillator_plus_semiconductor_detectors)
p

Randy Moe
27-Feb-2016, 09:15
Further reading reveals they can auto stitch the imagery.

http://digital-radiology.fujimed.com/flat-panel-detectors/17x17-csi/advanced-applications/

Iluvmyviewcam
27-Feb-2016, 09:37
I wish they mad a FF 6mp 6 x 6 back for the Hassy and brought it in at $2500

RHITMrB
27-Feb-2016, 11:55
do you think, this is the same technology that Largesense (http://www.largesense.com) is using?

p

I suspect it's Mitchell Feinberg's custom back: http://aphotoeditor.com/2011/08/23/mitchell-feinbergs-8x10-digital-capture-back/

Compare figure 6 in the PDF to the photo of the back in this link.

pjotr
27-Feb-2016, 15:12
Yes it's the back he is using. But my question was, if they (http://largesense.com) are using the x-ray detector's cmos too.
p

koraks
28-Feb-2016, 05:12
They might, but the question is to what extent the similarities are relevant. The largesense would have a bayer array attached to it, making the entire subassembly a custom piece. That the actual photodetector itself is a cmos array is quite likely. That it originates from DALSA is also quite likely, as they're one of the few (or perhaps the only one) in the world who manufacture image sensors at this size. There are bound to be many technical similarities, but there are nearly just as many technical similarities between the CMOS sensor in a consumer-grade Canon camera and the 8x10 sensor(s) discussed here. What does the phrase 'same technology' mean? The same fundamental physics concepts? The same manufacturing technology? Identical parts used? How similar must it be to be the 'same' to you? If you look into it deeply enough, it becomes a moot point given the structure of the semiconductor industry and the state of technology regarding cmos sensors.

Amedeus
28-Feb-2016, 23:28
All these examples use sensors developed for x-ray imaging though the use of a scintillator, converting X-rays to visible light, which is then imaged through standard light sensitive materials. Either a CMOS, an amorphous silicon or yes, film.

The reason for the low resolution is the size of the individual scintillator crystal matrix, the latter is not very high resolution to start with. Some are working on smaller but it takes many years to fab a next generation.

There are quite a few manufacturers other than DALSA making large chips. Sony puts as far as I know more large DSLR and MF sensors out than anyone else. The X-ray sensors are made by houses specializing in that application. (I used to work for one and run a CCD department ... )

Although I would love to shoot digital with 4x5 and 8x10 sensors, I don't see myself forking money out for one at the current announced resolutions. It will be somewhat affordable but I don't see the point on shooting 12MP images on a 8x10 digital sensor.

Doesn't make sense for my workflow, it may make sense for others.

YMMV

Rudi A.