Exploring Photo-Sensor Measurements for Brightness Change Evaluation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the evaluation of brightness changes using photo-sensors in commercial and industrial cameras. Participants explore whether the pixel values in raw image files represent absolute values or are weighted by a luminosity function, considering the implications for photometric measurements and human perception of light.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Jim questions whether the pixel values in the images are absolute or weighted by a luminosity function, expressing uncertainty about the raw data from the sensors.
  • One participant suggests contacting the sensor manufacturer for a 'quantum efficiency' curve to understand the spectral weighting function of the sensor, indicating skepticism about the match between the QE curve and photometric curves.
  • Another participant posits that higher-end cameras likely provide raw output for post-processing, arguing against the logic of filtering light according to human vision during image capture.
  • A different participant emphasizes that the eye cannot reliably perform the weighting of light, noting that imaging systems do not present the precise spectrum of a scene to the eye, which complicates the perception of brightness.
  • This participant also points out that a photometer would provide numerical values rather than a color image, highlighting the complexities of color analysis and display in imaging systems.
  • Concerns are raised about the non-linear and time-dependent nature of human perception, suggesting that calibration would be necessary for accurate brightness measurements.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the pixel values are absolute or weighted, with no consensus reached on the nature of the data from the sensors or the implications for photometric measurements.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexities of human perception and the limitations of imaging systems in accurately representing light spectra, but do not resolve the specific question of pixel value representation.

Kamuro
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I'm using photo-sensors from commercial and industrial cameras to document an experiment. Afterwarde I evaluate the change in brightness during the test of a fixed segment of every image I took. The ambient light condition is stable and the images are in raw files, but I'm unsure how raw they are.

I read that in photometry, the radiant power of each wavelength is weighted by a luminosity function, because they want to mimic the sensitivity of the human eye to different wavelengths.

Does this happen here, too? I mean, I know that the sensors are reading absolute values, but are the absolute values weighted by a luminosity function in the camera afterwards? Or do the images contain the absolute values and our eye does the weightening?

In the end, I just want to know if the pixel of the images I reading out are in absolute or weighted values. I could not find anything so far on the web. I'm grateful for every help I'm getting!

regards
Jim
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science news on Phys.org
Kamuro said:
In the end, I just want to know if the pixel of the images I reading out are in absolute or weighted values. I could not find anything so far on the web. I'm grateful for every help I'm getting!

I think you should ask the sensor manufacturer for a 'quantum efficiency' curve, that will tell you the spectral weighting function of the sensor. I doubt the QE curve will match a photometric curve...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Asymptotic and BvU
Interesting question. I would think that for most higher end commercial/industrial/scientific cameras you are getting the "raw" output because it is more useful for post-processing to have all the data.

Also, it would be logically flawed to filter the light according to human vision when recording the image because then if you display the image it looks double-filtered -- unless you are specifically trying to measure something according to human perception (which is itself variable and imprecise).

That said, it is important to remember that pretty much all cameras are inherently monochrome and color is typically added in post-processing based on selective filtering during image acquisition.
 
@Kamuro
If you are discussing Photometry then the following Wiki statement is relevant:
"Photometry is the science of the measurement of light, in terms of its perceived brightness to the human eye."
So that answers one of your questions.
Kamuro said:
Or do the images contain the absolute values and our eye does the weighting?
The eye cannot be relied on to do the weighting.
The logic is that the eye / brain could only do the weighting precisely if the precise spectrum of the original scene were presented to it. This never happens in any imaging system. A monochrome camera / photometer will have a weighting filter and it would, presumably, have a monochrome display of some sort of colour. If the display is 'white' than the particular white point would need to be specified. Clearly not practical. A colour camera uses three colour analysis with three filters and the display uses three primaries for the display. The analysis and display are aimed at giving as good subjective colour match as possible (it cannot reproduce the spectrum of the scene) - the eye can only work with that.
A photometer will give you a number (perhaps three numbers) - not a picture of a colour.

In addition, the eye's sensitivity / perception is not linear and it is time dependent (dark adaptation etc.). If a photometer is to give the perceived brightness for an observer, there would be a lot of calibration needed, to take actual light levels and viewing conditions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
Replies
7
Views
2K