fotografr Posted March 29, 2014 Share #1 Posted March 29, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I know there are people on this forum who are a lot more tech savvy than I am, so I'm hoping someone can answer this question. Are CMOS chips less prone to dead/hot pixels than CCDs? The reason for the question is that my Monochrom has just gone in for a hot pixel fix for the second time in six months. Is this normal? If it was just one little spot, I'd fix it in Photoshop. But there's a white line that extends above and below the hot pixel and it can be a pain to deal with. Thanks, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 29, 2014 Posted March 29, 2014 Hi fotografr, Take a look here CMOS vs CCD. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
mjh Posted March 29, 2014 Share #2 Posted March 29, 2014 Are CMOS chips less prone to dead/hot pixels than CCDs? I am not aware of any difference (or any reason why there should be a difference in this respect). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted March 29, 2014 Author Share #3 Posted March 29, 2014 In a different thread about hot/dead pixels, someone indicated CMOS chips were less prone to the problem. I'm just wondering if there is any scientific basis for that statement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevesurf Posted March 29, 2014 Share #4 Posted March 29, 2014 "The search engine is your friend" as they say First, it's a good idea to understand the difference between Dead/Stuck/Hot Pixels, here. According to IDS, a solution provider, CCDs are less prone to hot pixels (not dead pixels) than CMOS: here. Here's the overall Wiki entry, here. One conclusion you can draw is that for a manufacturer with a higher QC and since CMOS are generally less costly than CCDs, there might be a smaller population of high dead-pixel-count imagers released to the camera assembly process. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 29, 2014 Share #5 Posted March 29, 2014 I’m not sure that modern tweaked CMOS sensors are still less expensive than CCD. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 30, 2014 Share #6 Posted March 30, 2014 If it was just one little spot, I'd fix it in Photoshop. But there's a white line that extends above and below the hot pixel and it can be a pain to deal with. With Photoshop there is a very simple, easy way to make an action that can fix the stuck or hot pixels automatically, in 'batch' for any number of images. Should we show you how? Or would you rather ignore the money you spent on Photoshop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted March 30, 2014 Author Share #7 Posted March 30, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) With Photoshop there is a very simple, easy way to make an action that can fix the stuck or hot pixels automatically, in 'batch' for any number of images. Should we show you how? Or would you rather ignore the money you spent on Photoshop. Actually, you don't have to. I just found this on another thread and assume it's what you're referring to: " Originally Posted by pico View Post I do not know if this will be helpful to you, but ... At work I had to fix a lot of pictures from the same camera where it had a dead pixel row. I created an action in Photoshop and saved it as a droplet. It worked beautifully and patched all the images in a couple minutes. It worked because the location was identical in every frame, as one should expect. Briefly, the action was something like this: Copy background layer to new layer. Select single-pixel row (or column) marquee in the new layer. Move it carefully just a pixel to the right of the white (dead pixel) row or column. Command-C. Them move it over the dead row or column. Command-V. Flatten image. Save." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted March 30, 2014 Share #8 Posted March 30, 2014 I think there was a thread started recently saying that if you reset your camera to factory default it cures many of these issues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoySmith Posted March 30, 2014 Share #9 Posted March 30, 2014 A while back Dougg posted a link to an Applescript that adds an opcode to a DNG file to map out the row that happens from a Bad Pixel. The author Eric Chan says it was written for images captured with CCD sensors. It works well with M9 DNG files but I don't know about CMOS files. Does anyone know Leica New Jersey's turn around time for sensor remapping ? Roy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted March 30, 2014 Author Share #10 Posted March 30, 2014 A while back Dougg posted a link to an Applescript that adds an opcode to a DNG file to map out the row that happens from a Bad Pixel. The author Eric Chan says it was written for images captured with CCD sensors. It works well with M9 DNG files but I don't know about CMOS files. Does anyone know Leica New Jersey's turn around time for sensor remapping ? Roy Last time it happened to me, the camera (MM) was back in my hands 10 days after I sent it in. Very quick service. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted March 30, 2014 Share #11 Posted March 30, 2014 A while back Dougg posted a link to an Applescript that adds an opcode to a DNG file to map out the row that happens from a Bad Pixel. The author Eric Chan says it was written for images captured with CCD sensors. It works well with M9 DNG files but I don't know about CMOS files. Does anyone know Leica New Jersey's turn around time for sensor remapping ? Roy Since there is currently a major reshuffle of "experts" in CS NJ, what has happened in the past could now be different for many of us until new and (hopefully) added people are up to good speed on common service issues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve P Posted March 30, 2014 Share #12 Posted March 30, 2014 Since there is currently a major reshuffle of "experts" in CS NJ, Would that be Crosby, Stills, Nash and Jung? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted April 9, 2014 Share #13 Posted April 9, 2014 Would that be Crosby, Stills, Nash and Jung? Show yourself out... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve P Posted April 9, 2014 Share #14 Posted April 9, 2014 Show yourself out... What? So they can't sing close harmony, but they really helped me out with some peculiar dreams I've been having lately:eek: Alright, alright...I'll get me coat! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.