Did you not study physics? Does this paper help?
<http://people.csail.mit.edu/hasinoff/pubs/hasinoff-photon-2012-preprint.pdf>
From the first page of the paper:
Image sensors measure scene irradiance by *counting* the number of
discrete photons incident on the sensor over a given time interval. In
digital sensors, the photoelectric eff ect is used to convert photons
into electrons, whereas image-based sensors rely on photo-sensitive
chemical reactions. In both cases, the independence of random individual
photon arrivals leads to photon noise, a signal-
dependent form of uncertainty that is a property of the underlying
signal itself.
My emphasis on *counting*
Chuck Norcutt
On 9/22/2015 1:10 AM, ChrisB wrote:
It would have been a great illustration if only he had been able to
count the drops. Because he couldn’t I felt that it was a rather
pointless one. And I come back to his definition of noise: the
variation in numbers of drops doesn’t seem to me to be a clever way
to describe it.
Chris
On 22 Sep 15, at 01:13, Chuck Norcutt
<chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Actually, I rather liked the analogy of raindrops and the quantum
nature of light. Made perfect sense to me.
Chuck Norcutt
On 9/21/2015 5:25 PM, ChrisB wrote:
Not as far as I could tell, Moose. I didn't mind the article, but
I didn't like his description of noise: the variation in light
hitting the sensor.
I think that you'd enjoy reading it.
Chris
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|