Digital camera noise reduction idea

[Viator]

I was curious if anyone has thought of the following way to
reduce image noise, in particular noise that comes from an
electromagnetic source i.e. not light. The idea is,
just cover most of the camera with tinfoil, everything except
the lens of course. By this method, the only signal noise
that affects the analog sensor elements will be of either
internal origin (the circuits) or optical.

But will it work? I haven't tried it, since I temporarily don't
have a digital camera.

 

[Marra]

It wont make any difference as the internal electronics are low
impedance anyway.

The noise is caused by the semiconductor material not outside
interference.

 

[acl]

It wont make any difference as the internal electronics are low
impedance anyway.

The noise is caused by the semiconductor material not outside
interference.

Part of it is also inherent in the incoming signal (because at low
enough levels the photon's discreteness is important).

 

[Didi]

I was curious if anyone has thought of the following way to
reduce image noise, in particular noise that comes from an
electromagnetic source i.e. not light. The idea is,
just cover most of the camera with tinfoil, everything except
the lens of course. By this method, the only signal noise
that affects the analog sensor elements will be of either
internal origin (the circuits) or optical.

But will it work? I haven't tried it, since I temporarily don't
have a digital camera.

No, it will not work. A tinfoil hat on the operators head
might be a more useful idea, though...

Dimiter

 

[EAL]

I was curious if anyone has thought of the following way to
reduce image noise, in particular noise that comes from an
electromagnetic source i.e. not light. The idea is,
just cover most of the camera with tinfoil, everything except
the lens of course. By this method, the only signal noise
that affects the analog sensor elements will be of either
internal origin (the circuits) or optical.

But will it work? I haven't tried it, since I temporarily don't
have a digital camera.

The noise comes from the sensor and the electronics, not from radio
signals around you.

You can reduce noise by cooling the camera. That reduces in the sensor
and electronics. Don't cool below freezing, though, because then the
battery will fail.

Ed

 

[Ron Hunter]

I was curious if anyone has thought of the following way to
reduce image noise, in particular noise that comes from an
electromagnetic source i.e. not light. The idea is,
just cover most of the camera with tinfoil, everything except
the lens of course. By this method, the only signal noise
that affects the analog sensor elements will be of either
internal origin (the circuits) or optical.

But will it work? I haven't tried it, since I temporarily don't
have a digital camera.

I think your tinfoil helmet has slipped.

 

[Ron Hunter]

The noise comes from the sensor and the electronics, not from radio
signals around you.

You can reduce noise by cooling the camera. That reduces in the sensor
and electronics. Don't cool below freezing, though, because then the
battery will fail.

Ed

It is true that even a small reduction in the temperature of the sensor
can greatly lower noise. However, one runs into power problems (lithium
batteries can help), and condensation problems when the camera is
returned to room temperatures.

 

[Chris Malcolm]

No, it will not work. A tinfoil hat on the operators head
might be a more useful idea, though...

It would help if the tinfoil was very thick, say an inch, and deep
frozen first before applying it to the camera half an hour before
taking a photograph.

 

[neon]

fools he doesn't own a camera therefore how can he possibly know anything about it.Besides a camera with 50 giga bites does not compare to a 3 giga bites. the noise if any is caused by the speed of the camera too slow you will get blury pictures and that is the name of the game

 

[Viator]

No, it will not work. A tinfoil hat on the operators head
might be a more useful idea, though...

I appreciate your maturity.

 

[Viator]

I think your tinfoil helmet has slipped.

Dealing with quality people like you is the spice of life.

 

[David L. Jones]

I was curious if anyone has thought of the following way to
reduce image noise, in particular noise that comes from an
electromagnetic source i.e. not light. The idea is,
just cover most of the camera with tinfoil, everything except
the lens of course. By this method, the only signal noise
that affects the analog sensor elements will be of either
internal origin (the circuits) or optical.

But will it work? I haven't tried it, since I temporarily don't
have a digital camera.

The "noise" does not come from external "signal noise", so shielding
it will do nothing.

Dave.

 

[Ron Hunter]

I appreciate your maturity.

Thanks. When one asks such a question one should be open to some ridicule.
It tends to promote rational thinking, and some research before posting.

 

[[email protected]]

Dealing with quality people like you is the spice of life.

Dealing with retarded ideas from clueless people is the leftover
meatloaf of life.
Oh, BTW *light* IS electromagnetic!

 

[Brian MW0GKX]

I was curious if anyone has thought of the following way to
reduce image noise, in particular noise that comes from an
electromagnetic source i.e. not light. The idea is,
just cover most of the camera with tinfoil, everything except
the lens of course. By this method, the only signal noise
that affects the analog sensor elements will be of either
internal origin (the circuits) or optical.

But will it work? I haven't tried it, since I temporarily don't
have a digital camera.

Buy a decent camera. Mine already has an aluminium casing.

 

[Ron Hunter]

Dealing with retarded ideas from clueless people is the leftover
meatloaf of life.
Oh, BTW *light* IS electromagnetic!

Oh? I guess physics has changed in the 40 years or so since I last
studied it. Seems to me, that at that time, light was made up of
'photons', and was only in the 'electromagnetic spectrum' by virtue of
wavelength considerations. VERY different from the flow of electrons,
at least by the standards I studied. Has this changed?

 

[acl]

[email protected] wrote:

Oh? I guess physics has changed in the 40 years or so since I last
studied it. Seems to me, that at that time, light was made up of
'photons', and was only in the 'electromagnetic spectrum' by virtue of
wavelength considerations. VERY different from the flow of electrons,
at least by the standards I studied. Has this changed?

No but there seems that there's some confusion here: light is
precisely coupled undulations in the electric and magnetic fields.
These are quantised, and the quantum is called the photon.

The flow of electrons is another story. But it can be cast in the same
terms. For that matter, sound waves in solids can be cast in the same
form: there, you'd probably think of them as "waves", but in fact they
can also be thought of as consisting of particles-phonons. And so on.

 

[Ron Hunter]

No but there seems that there's some confusion here: light is
precisely coupled undulations in the electric and magnetic fields.
These are quantised, and the quantum is called the photon.

The flow of electrons is another story. But it can be cast in the same
terms. For that matter, sound waves in solids can be cast in the same
form: there, you'd probably think of them as "waves", but in fact they
can also be thought of as consisting of particles-phonons. And so on.

Well, since sound has the 'medium', of matter, and travels as motion of
molecules (or atoms), it seems to obey much the same rules, but can't
travel through a vacuum.

 

[acl]

Well, since sound has the 'medium', of matter, and travels as motion of
molecules (or atoms), it seems to obey much the same rules, but can't
travel through a vacuum.

True, I was just commenting that switching between thinking of
something as particles and as waves is done in many different
contexts, not only for electromagnetic radiation. It just depends on
how closely you look (like light: normally you're fine thinking of it
as waves, but if you look too closely, it's sort of made up of
discrete particles).

That sound "quanta" are different from light quanta is also signified
by the fact that they have a different name

 

[[email protected]]

Oh? I guess physics has changed in the 40 years or so since I last
studied it. Seems to me, that at that time, light was made up of
'photons', and was only in the 'electromagnetic spectrum' by virtue of
wavelength considerations. VERY different from the flow of electrons,
at least by the standards I studied. Has this changed?

Hilarious from Mr "It tends to promote rational thinking, and some
research before posting. "