01:50 | fsteinel | left the channel | |
01:50 | fsteinel_ | joined the channel | |
02:40 | intracube | changed nick to: intracube|away
| |
02:47 | spookdigit | left the channel | |
03:52 | Bertl_oO | off to bed now ... have a good one everyone!
| |
03:52 | Bertl_oO | changed nick to: Bertl_zZ
| |
05:50 | slikdigit_ | joined the channel | |
05:50 | slikdigit_ | changed nick to: spookdigit
| |
06:59 | spookdigit | left the channel | |
07:58 | sebix | joined the channel | |
08:09 | sebix | left the channel | |
11:06 | se6astian|away | changed nick to: se6astian
| |
11:48 | danieel | se6astian: the article with debayering is really misleading.. some facts are just not true
| |
11:57 | se6astian | I am happy to forward your feedback to the author
| |
11:58 | danieel | i wonder, there was no review? usually unposted articles appear here, no?
| |
12:13 | Bertl_zZ | changed nick to: Bertl
| |
12:13 | Bertl | morning folks!
| |
12:15 | Bertl | danieel: facts are always true, but I think you meant statements presented as fact
| |
12:16 | danieel | correct :)
| |
12:19 | Bertl | but I'm sure, sebastian is happy to publish your article if you write one ... it seems to be the slow time of the year :)
| |
12:20 | danieel | what about is the most interest in?
| |
12:20 | danieel | (got some comparison of past article pageviews / popularity ?)
| |
12:20 | Bertl | everything color science related seems to be very popular
| |
12:21 | Bertl | compression is probably a runner up
| |
12:29 | se6astian | time for a walk
| |
12:29 | se6astian | bbl
| |
12:29 | se6astian | changed nick to: se6astian|away
| |
12:30 | fsteinel_ | changed nick to: fsteinel
| |
15:10 | Bertl | off for now ... bbl
| |
15:10 | Bertl | changed nick to: Bertl_oO
| |
15:19 | se6astian|away | changed nick to: se6astian
| |
16:42 | intracube|away | changed nick to: intracube
| |
18:15 | sebix | joined the channel | |
18:42 | sebix | left the channel | |
18:46 | sebix | joined the channel | |
18:57 | sebix | left the channel | |
19:07 | pozitron | joined the channel | |
19:15 | sebix | joined the channel | |
19:21 | troy_s | Plurality of truths.
| |
19:21 | troy_s | Welcome to the Postmodern era for those of you stuck in late Modernism.
| |
19:22 | troy_s | danieel: In particular, what did you dislike / consider "untruth" in the article?
| |
19:22 | comradekingu | danieel: i can correct the flaws if you point them out
| |
19:22 | troy_s | comradekingu: I'm more interested to hear what they are.
| |
19:22 | troy_s | (first at least)
| |
19:23 | comradekingu | danieel posts the flaws, we factcheck it, and then correct. If in error, i dont think the original author will mind the text changing
| |
19:24 | troy_s | comradekingu: Typo here to fix though "...imaries D e-Baye...imaries D e-Bayer..."
| |
19:24 | troy_s | Pretty sure that is an errant space.
| |
19:27 | troy_s | I will say that the ratio of pixels that are interpolated appears wrong.
| |
19:27 | troy_s | I believe that any given typical RGGB styled Bayer array means that
| |
19:28 | troy_s | 20.8% of your pixels are properly sampled, with subsampled pixels then making up the remaining 79.2 %
| |
19:28 | troy_s | ;)
| |
19:29 | troy_s | Erp that's bad math on my part methinks. Let me run it.
| |
19:29 | troy_s | Ah it works out precisely 66.6% Well done.
| |
19:29 | troy_s | My bad.
| |
19:30 | troy_s | danieel: Can you cite where you see issues?
| |
19:30 | comradekingu | The errant space is a <span class="dropcap">D</span>e-Bayering ...
| |
19:30 | troy_s | Ah it's supposed to be a drops cap.
| |
19:30 | troy_s | But doesn't render that way here.
| |
19:30 | comradekingu | it shows as a large capital letter like in newspapers, maybe just a css error on your view
| |
19:30 | troy_s | Although I am quite amused at the homebrew demosaicing techniques.
| |
19:31 | comradekingu | I think the shoodak stuff should be in a follow-up article
| |
19:31 | troy_s | comradekingu: It's in the summary page. Go to apertus.org and you will see the strange look.
| |
19:32 | comradekingu | link?
| |
19:32 | troy_s | comradekingu: Just go to apertus.org
| |
19:33 | comradekingu | sometimes its De-Bayering, and sometimes its inconsistently "debayering"
| |
19:33 | troy_s | Read the article in question and you will see that the summary snippet has that odd space where the drops cap shows up (which renders fine when you read the whole article.
| |
19:33 | troy_s | It's debayering or demosaicing
| |
19:33 | troy_s | Or demosaicking
| |
19:33 | troy_s | The hyphenation is completely odd as hell whenever I see it.
| |
19:33 | troy_s | It's not like it is an existing word that has been 'hacked' to be undone.
| |
19:34 | troy_s | I need a coffee.
| |
19:34 | danieel | i would go for demosaicing
| |
19:34 | troy_s | Hrm. Seems there were a few comments on the colour article. I guess that's positive.
| |
19:34 | troy_s | (I didn't think there would be anyone at all interested.)
| |
19:35 | danieel | all video cameras with CCD <-- untrue. only highend cams were 3 chip, other/mainstream were bayer
| |
19:35 | troy_s | danieel: Probably agree. But that nuance and nitpicky rubbish aside, where did you see an error?
| |
19:36 | danieel | or did the author mean tubes? they were usually made that way (3 tubes for color)
| |
19:37 | troy_s | I wasn't under the impression any cameras used beam splitters though.
| |
19:38 | troy_s | Now that you mention it.
| |
19:38 | danieel | "with the introduction of cmos chips" ... well, CFA is totally unrelated of ccd or cmos technolgy
| |
19:38 | troy_s | Because CCDs almost certainly don't use beam splitters (the Genesis most certainly didn't.)
| |
19:38 | danieel | the genesis is a RGB striped CFA
| |
19:38 | danieel | like a LCD
| |
19:39 | danieel | and probably nonsquare pixels therefore
| |
19:39 | troy_s | Well it is referenced as a CCD in all of their literature.
| |
19:39 | troy_s | Hence my sloppy terminology.
| |
19:39 | danieel | the Bayer patents is based on different sensitivity to luma than chroma... not specifically colors as this article states
| |
19:40 | troy_s | A luma bias is hard to do without mentionning colour.
| |
19:40 | troy_s | It's a fair shortcut wouldn't you say?
| |
19:40 | danieel | the artefact images are from the wikipedia... but it seems nobody read the article :)
| |
19:40 | troy_s | Two greens for every other red and blue? (chromaticity of each notwithstanding)
| |
19:41 | troy_s | Artefact?
| |
19:42 | danieel | the 6 little square images showing issues with demosaicing
| |
19:42 | troy_s | Ah. Yes.
| |
19:42 | troy_s | I _did_ read the article you jerk.
| |
19:42 | troy_s | I didn't dwell on those images though. Good point.
| |
19:42 | danieel | you wrote this debayer article?
| |
19:42 | troy_s | God no.
| |
19:42 | troy_s | I wrote the colour article.
| |
19:43 | danieel | im discussing the debayer article, last one
| |
19:43 | troy_s | I know.
| |
19:43 | troy_s | I did read that one.
| |
19:43 | comradekingu | fixed "De-Bayering" the CCD issue, and "Colour"
| |
19:43 | troy_s | Colour / color is whatever
| |
19:43 | troy_s | that's a UK / Canada versus USA etc.
| |
19:44 | troy_s | I wouldn't worry about that.
| |
19:44 | comradekingu | sticking to one througout the article is the winning move
| |
19:44 | comradekingu | I do
| |
19:44 | troy_s | Yes.
| |
19:44 | troy_s | Agree.
| |
19:44 | troy_s | I agree on that front.
| |
19:44 | comradekingu | If it starts with The secret of the two missing colours, it shouldnt be consistently "color" from there
| |
19:45 | danieel | the examples should be really graded same.. and have the same resolution (if they are the same frame).. so that one can do arithmetic subtractiona and see the minor details
| |
19:45 | comradekingu | I was going to run this article through the "so-that-people-like-me-understand"-filter, but i dont understand de-bayering well enough
| |
19:48 | comradekingu | the whole thing starts with "It is called De-Bayering." and then a picture of something that isnt de-bayering
| |
19:48 | danieel | the last paragraph is then confusing - they are developing a new and simple low quality algorithm, but it should improve the industry? :)
| |
19:48 | danieel | comradekingu: good point :) that hit me first as well
| |
19:48 | troy_s | danieel: Sounds like you are writing an article.
| |
19:48 | danieel | that prism stuff should go away
| |
19:49 | troy_s | debayering is very simple
| |
19:49 | troy_s | You have a bayer
| |
19:49 | troy_s | you need to subsample (yes my math friend beat me to death over this) the "gaps"
| |
19:49 | comradekingu | Or could call the article " The secret of the two missing colours"
| |
19:49 | troy_s | or more truthfully, you are sampling the signal at the interval that it doesn't exist.
| |
19:49 | troy_s | So at least I agree with both of you on two points;
| |
19:50 | comradekingu | and then make a thing out of how its either the prism, or the debayering/demosaic, and that the latter is often proprietary
| |
19:50 | troy_s | 1) That the prism stuffs is rather misdirecting to a degree. Perhaps a historical bit on the tricolor film would have been more reasonable.
| |
19:50 | comradekingu | "The secret of the missing colours" is a good name
| |
19:50 | troy_s | 2) The last bit on the homebrew amateur demosaic is also extra
| |
19:50 | troy_s | by the way, looked at the new "P3" iMac
| |
19:50 | troy_s | Impressive display it seems
| |
19:51 | comradekingu | who made it?
| |
19:51 | troy_s | couldn't test the panel, but I suspect it is the same panel in the HP z27 and the others
| |
19:51 | danieel | it is not proprietary - they are several algorithms described.. in scientific papers and so on.. but competitive cameras use their own hidden essence here :)
| |
19:51 | troy_s | The good news is that the blue and red primaries are darn close to the P3
| |
19:51 | comradekingu | yes, but the whole article is a low-down on how to understand and use it
| |
19:51 | troy_s | green is shy
| |
19:51 | danieel | *there
| |
19:51 | troy_s | I'm VERY interested to know how the hell OSX handles that mess though
| |
19:51 | comradekingu | posing as just 1/3 of those things
| |
19:52 | troy_s | Because the UI elements would be of two states:
| |
19:52 | troy_s | 1) NOT color managed
| |
19:52 | troy_s | 2) Color managed
| |
19:52 | troy_s | if the (1) folks are going to see batshit crazy wrong colours in colour pickers etc.
| |
19:52 | troy_s | if (2) it's going to break a crapload of software that knows what it is doing and is expecting the UI to simply display the colours as-is.
| |
19:53 | sebix | left the channel | |
19:54 | danieel | the profile is give to color managed software, while non color managed parts gets the profile applied in the OS ? i do not see any issue here
| |
19:56 | comradekingu | shouldnt there be a mention of faevon sensors in this article?
| |
19:58 | danieel | you cant mention everything.. then it comes to question if RGBE should be mentioned, or CMY sensors
| |
19:59 | danieel | or the striped RGB genesis :)
| |
19:59 | danieel | what the article should mention is that simple debayer is done that way: *** (math formula)
| |
19:59 | comradekingu | Is that everything then?
| |
19:59 | danieel | and that new one is doing it differently, and what is the improvement (processing time, quality, ... whatever)
| |
20:00 | comradekingu | That is a different article on shoodak imo
| |
20:00 | dmjnova | danieel: RGBE?
| |
20:00 | danieel | dmjnova: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1471104084/sonyrgbeccd
| |
20:00 | troy_s | danieel: You are missing my point.
| |
20:00 | danieel | (actually i own a Sony F828)
| |
20:00 | troy_s | Let's say you load an icon
| |
20:00 | troy_s | That icon is RGB
| |
20:00 | troy_s | so it hands say, 0.1,0.2,0.3 display referred RGB to the display
| |
20:01 | troy_s | Let's pretend that is sRGB
| |
20:01 | danieel | the screen is sRGB?
| |
20:01 | troy_s | (as is going to be the most typical case)
| |
20:01 | troy_s | No the display is P3
| |
20:01 | troy_s | The new iMac
| |
20:01 | dmjnova | Ah, the cyan version of something I've been wanting for a while
| |
20:01 | danieel | so the understanding of icon file is sRGB
| |
20:01 | dmjnova | RGBIr
| |
20:01 | troy_s | so now Apple's magic ColorSync goes "oh this is untagged (or tagged) so I'll assume sRGB and convert to DCI-P3. MAGIC!!!!"
| |
20:01 | troy_s | But now let's consider an industrial application like Nuke... it shows a colour picker.
| |
20:02 | danieel | dmjnova: yes, there are RGBIr, and also RGBW :) sooo many options
| |
20:02 | troy_s | Say a wheel.
| |
20:02 | troy_s | Nuke goes "Ok... we've adjusted the colour wheel as per the configuration file. Let's display it."
| |
20:02 | dmjnova | danieel: Hmm...not seen one, but would love such a filter for the CMV12k
| |
20:03 | troy_s | Then ColorSync goes "Oh wait... this is untagged data... our default is that untagged data is sRGB... Let's transform sRGB to DCI-P3's iMac profile. MAGIC!!!!"
| |
20:07 | danieel | that would happen if app based color management is unrealted to OS.. i think the OS knows what is and is not tagged :)
| |
20:08 | danieel | there will be no funny magic
| |
20:08 | danieel | maybe in windows :))
| |
20:08 | troy_s | danieel: Trust me
| |
20:08 | troy_s | That OS can't be smart
| |
20:08 | troy_s | It will fuck things up
| |
20:08 | troy_s | badly
| |
20:08 | danieel | only if the app is uncooperative :)
| |
20:08 | troy_s | When writing applications, you can't have hidden and secret "magic" transforms.
| |
20:09 | troy_s | If I want to write RGB values to screen, you have to let me because you have NO IDEA WHAT I AM WRITING
| |
20:09 | troy_s | Am I writing a linearized texture? Am I writing RGB data that has no spec'd (in profile in system) "space"?
| |
20:09 | troy_s | Am I writing internally controlled values?
| |
20:09 | se6astian | thanks for the feedback, I adapted the first few paragraphs of the article a bit to correct the CCD vs CMOS issue
| |
20:09 | troy_s | You simply can NEVER magic the crap.
| |
20:10 | troy_s | danieel: Also, you seem to imply that the ICC system is "the one true colour management" system
| |
20:10 | troy_s | Which is fundamentally a bad idea.
| |
20:10 | troy_s | Largely because ICCs are specifically _display referred_ colour management with a keen eye on graphic design.
| |
20:10 | comradekingu | Isnt bayering originally the three layers in celluloid film?
| |
20:11 | troy_s | They do that remarkably well and admirably, including Black Point Compensation and Total Area Coverage for inks etc.
| |
20:11 | troy_s | comradekingu: No
| |
20:11 | troy_s | comradekingu: Colour film literally has three layers
| |
20:11 | danieel | comradekingu: if you would use the correct term: demosaicing, then you would see no - there is no mosaic
| |
20:11 | troy_s | comradekingu: And in terms of film, aside from silver issues in terms of grain size, there is a precisely 1:1 correspondence with the region on each
| |
20:11 | comradekingu | where did bayering come from then?
| |
20:11 | troy_s | It's a name. Bayer.
| |
20:12 | troy_s | Kodak.
| |
20:12 | intracube | troy_s: doesn't film actually have way more in practice?
| |
20:12 | comradekingu | year?
| |
20:12 | troy_s | The peep that invented the actual checkerboard.
| |
20:12 | intracube | like two layers for each primary?
| |
20:12 | intracube | different grain sizes and such??
| |
20:12 | intracube | sticky ? key
| |
20:12 | intracube | <- nitpick
| |
20:13 | intracube | and hello :)
| |
20:14 | intracube | sorry for derailing the convo
| |
20:21 | troy_s | intracube: For our purposes in this discussion, if we think of three layers of film as three "planes" of arbitrary chromaticity, there is a 1:1 relationship between the coordinates and each plane
| |
20:21 | troy_s | intracube: Sorry was on phone.
| |
20:22 | intracube | np. just thought I'd killed the conversation with my rather pointless interjection :)
| |
20:22 | troy_s | intracube: So when the lens resolves a line say, the line crosses through (again, silver nuances aside) one unit per plane.
| |
20:23 | intracube | the resolution is stacked one-on-top. not interleaved like sensor bayer patterns
| |
20:23 | intracube | yep
| |
20:26 | troy_s | Exactly.
| |
20:26 | troy_s | Although I believe some CCDs do something akin to that (or some sensor somewhere)
| |
20:27 | troy_s | Can neither confirm nor deny, but I was under the impression that some Foveons might do something like that.
| |
20:27 | danieel | foveon does stack 3 layers on top of each other
| |
20:27 | dmjnova | that was the whole deal with foveon
| |
20:27 | troy_s | intracube: The criticical part about that (which is _precisely_ why a good film emulation LUT is 3D and not just a contrast curve 1D LUT)
| |
20:27 | danieel | the latest one then uses a combination of smaller/larger pixels :) so it is 4 small on top + 1 under them + 1 under that
| |
20:27 | troy_s | intracube: Is that when you cast light through three unique silver based layers, the colours "crosstalk" in _very_ unique ways for a number of reasons.
| |
20:28 | troy_s | Hence why you _must_ use a 3D LUT to achieve that warping of the RGB values.
| |
20:28 | troy_s | danieel: That's very interesting. So a quad of FOUR sensors, then one under, then one under?
| |
20:28 | intracube | troy_s: that's interesting (and something I've been experimenting quite a bit)
| |
20:28 | intracube | not methodically, though
| |
20:28 | troy_s | intracube: It isn't just like some sort of ideal wavelength filter.
| |
20:28 | danieel | troy_s: http://img1.lesnumeriques.com/news/34/34708/Foveon_Quattro.jpg
| |
20:29 | intracube | of course, yeah
| |
20:29 | danieel | the layers are not RGB, but rather (RGB),(RG),(R)
| |
20:29 | troy_s | intracube: It's like a blender... the first layer leeches out the information it wants and mangles it slightly because of chemicals into the recording, then the next layer gets handed a mangled version of light and does the same, then the last gets the final mangled mess.
| |
20:29 | troy_s | intracube: Folks get confused with crosstalk, but that is precisely the best medium to really understand it.
| |
20:30 | troy_s | intracube: Like when visual effects folks want to pull keys in the native camera space
| |
20:30 | troy_s | intracube: Due to crosstalk if you bend it to another one.
| |
20:30 | troy_s | intracube: If you take a demosaiced image and try to key from it, you are already one generation away from the metal, which means you are dealing with sampled values that are not quite exactly what the lens saw.
| |
20:31 | troy_s | If you go another generation away by changing colour spaces, your keys get even more distanced, in particular due to the magic in the subsampling.
| |
20:31 | intracube | yep
| |
20:31 | troy_s | Hard thing to try and explain it seems.
| |
20:32 | intracube | troy_s: and w/regard to the film process. it's been tweaked and adjusted over the decades, the lack of accuracy has become something desirable
| |
20:32 | intracube | the 'film look'
| |
20:34 | troy_s | intracube: It's a magic box that is a great little entry point for creativity I guess.
| |
20:34 | troy_s | intracube: But from a practical point, say mixing CGI with the stock, you have to be careful there.
| |
20:34 | troy_s | (hence why the 3D LUT is critical)
| |
20:35 | intracube | danieel: does the stacked sensor design impact the sensitivity much?
| |
20:35 | danieel | never saw a datasheet of the foveon sensors
| |
20:35 | danieel | so regarding sensitivity i have no data
| |
20:35 | intracube | ah ok
| |
20:36 | intracube | I thought there was generally overlap between the filters for the primaries
| |
20:36 | intracube | so in practice, the blue filter would be slightly filtering some green wavelengths
| |
20:37 | danieel | where?
| |
20:37 | danieel | in the stacked sensor there are no filters.. it is just absorbed into the silicon
| |
20:38 | intracube | ok, but is the silicon effectively absorbing some wavelengths and letting others pass to the lower layers?
| |
20:38 | troy_s | There should be some crosstalk for certain.
| |
20:38 | intracube | if the overlap is anything like: https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/courses/compsci708s1c/lectures/Glect-html/rgb-ideal.GIF
| |
20:38 | danieel | yes, longer waveforms (red/ir) passes deeper
| |
20:38 | troy_s | (Which isn't a bad thing necessarily, just makes the transform a little messier.)
| |
20:38 | intracube | I would have thought a small amount of loss would be unavoidable
| 20:44 | intracube | misses that natural 90s film look
|
20:44 | danieel | what natural?
| |
20:45 | intracube | fairly unprocessed (other than traditional timing)
| |
20:45 | intracube | pre digital intermediate/digital colour correcting
| |
20:46 | danieel | you can still shoot on film :)
| |
20:46 | intracube | indeed. wasn't there crowd funding to get a film factory in Italy back up and running?
| 20:46 | intracube | wonders what happened to it
|
20:46 | danieel | it was for stills, wasnt?
| |
20:47 | intracube | I'm not sure. it might have been this: http://www.filmferrania.it/
| |
20:48 | danieel | but even if they do make 8/16mm.. where to develop it?
| |
20:49 | danieel | offering a complex service (as Kodak focused on) would be nice
| |
20:49 | troy_s | intracube: That's a disconnect between understanding colour coupled with a rather ideological bit of cruft around nostalgia, authenticity, and other strange things.
| |
20:50 | troy_s | intracube: There's no reason at _all_ that with a decent entry RGB point you can't get Insert-Your-Favorite-Stock-Magic-Here.
| |
20:50 | troy_s | Precisely down to the latitude if you want.
| |
20:53 | intracube | troy_s: of course, yep. but movies usually go for a heavy stylised look these days
| |
20:53 | intracube | danieel: it'd be great if they offered a full service
| |
20:54 | troy_s | intracube: Not terribly fair to comment on creative choices is it?
| |
20:55 | troy_s | (I mean it's totally fair, but sort of... nebulous in the highest level view?)
| |
20:55 | intracube | absolutely, it is :P
| |
20:55 | troy_s | (we could certainly comment on whether we think a look is "working" for a given piece, whatever the goals and aims)
| |
20:56 | intracube | it's personal preference, of course
| |
20:56 | comradekingu | whos editing the page, i cant save now
| 20:56 | intracube | would just prefer fewer films to have lifted blue shadows and very rolled of yellow highlights ;)
|
20:56 | comradekingu | i reworked the whole article
| |
21:06 | se6astian | we have been reddited once more: https://www.reddit.com/r/cinematography/comments/3r1z1b/where_did_that_open_source_4k_camera_end_up/
| |
21:07 | comradekingu | Nitpickers, meticulously start your collective engines https://apertus.org/node/413/revisions/3801/view
| |
21:09 | comradekingu | "The part where the market progressed, does not encompass the evolvement carried out by apertus"
| |
21:10 | comradekingu | which is what i would post if i was a redditor
| |
21:10 | comradekingu | I bet that guy would say the trolltech phone wasnt important either
| |
21:11 | comradekingu | And as always, http://apertus.org/home-wip is relevant to the difference between industry and apertus
| |
21:13 | troy_s | what the hell is envolvement?
| |
21:13 | troy_s | involvement?
| |
21:13 | comradekingu | where does it say that?
| |
21:15 | troy_s | Ah nevermind. I read your comment above.
| |
21:15 | troy_s | Thought it was a posted comment.
| |
21:15 | troy_s | I was wondering what envolvement was... but I see you meant involvement.
| |
21:15 | troy_s | (English crap)
| |
21:15 | intracube | comradekingu: I get access denied for your link (I'm already logged in)
| |
21:15 | troy_s | I am not certain their thoughts are entirely off base regarding costs for certain.
| |
21:16 | comradekingu | sebastian has to publish or semi-publish it, i dont have write-access
| |
21:16 | troy_s | It can kill a project, but the costs of scale aren't something afforded to our two humble devs.
| |
21:17 | intracube | comradekingu: I mean I can't view it
| |
21:17 | comradekingu | If what you want is 4K, 4K can be had. If you want an open source camera, it can be had in a 4K variety
| |
21:17 | comradekingu | I know, its just sitting around pending approval
| |
21:18 | troy_s | I am deadly interested to see how the global shutter behaves.
| |
21:18 | comradekingu | But do post an update of process, grants, sensor info and such on the reddit
| |
21:48 | dmjnova | left the channel | |
22:07 | danieel | se6astian / Bertl_oO : check how does XCN15034 apply to microzed, to avoid later issues (my friend discovered that "feature" in a pretty expensive way prior it was published)
| |
22:08 | se6astian | you mean http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/customer_notices/xcn15034.pdf I presume?
| |
22:09 | danieel | yes
| |
22:10 | se6astian | thanks for the notice
| |
22:10 | se6astian | Bertl_oO: will be able to determine if that is relevant for us
| |
22:10 | danieel | hes _oO, i do not know if it raises attention, so remind him or make a tak
| |
22:10 | danieel | *task
| |
22:10 | Bertl_oO | no worries, it does :)
| |
22:11 | danieel | good then :)
| |
22:13 | Bertl_oO | PR_POR_B seems to be tied to the 1.5V PG output
| |
22:14 | Bertl_oO | (on the MicroZed) which in turn is sequenced after 1V/1V8
| |
22:14 | Bertl_oO | actually it is the 3V3 PG output, which is sequenced last
| |
22:15 | Bertl_oO | so I think that should be fine for us
| |
22:32 | pozitron | left the channel | |
22:47 | se6astian | time to sleep
| |
22:47 | se6astian | good night
| |
22:47 | se6astian | changed nick to: se6astian|away
| |
23:14 | dmjnova | joined the channel | |
23:57 | Bertl_oO | off to bed now ... have a good one everyone!
| |
23:57 | Bertl_oO | changed nick to: Bertl_zZ
|