Yikes! Cosmic rays ate my pixels!

[jlw]

Anyone else notice this note on page 125 of the M8 user manual?

Sensor
Cosmic radiation (e.g. on flights) can cause pixel defects.

I've never heard that one before, but I assume it must apply to other cameras' CCD sensors too. Just think, every time you take your camera on a plane trip, you may arrive at your destination with one or two fewer working pixels than you had when you left.

I think I'll go post this on photo.net and see if I can start a mass panic...

[Gabriel M.A.]

Originally Posted by jlw

I think I'll go post this on photo.net and see if I can start a mass panic...

Over there? A mass sneering, I'd bet.

I heard of that; it would explain for the "new" dead pixels that my 10D got right after my last trip to Europe. I always thought it was a coincidence.

[JoeFriday]

that's why it's smart to wrap your cameras in tinfoil when taking them on planes.. doesn't hurt to wear a tinfoil cup, too

[sf]

just put the thing in a lead bag.

[lmd91343]

Originally Posted by JoeFriday

that's why it's smart to wrap your cameras in tinfoil when taking them on planes.. doesn't hurt to wear a tinfoil cup, too

Just make sure you don't sit with the sunlight in your lap too long!

I don't know if you are serious about wrapping your camera in tin foil. I would think that any cosmic rays that would pass through the plane's aluminum skin and airframe would pass through tin foil.

I've been looking to buy a digital camera after the first of the year. I had planned to use it for travel. I have to think this through again.

[DavidH]

Originally Posted by jlw

Anyone else notice this note on page 125 of the M8 user manual?

Sensor
Cosmic radiation (e.g. on flights) can cause pixel defects.

I've never heard that one before, but I assume it must apply to other cameras' CCD sensors too. Just think, every time you take your camera on a plane trip, you may arrive at your destination with one or two fewer working pixels than you had when you left.

It's surprising how few people have heard of this...but it can be a very serious problem. I had a TV camera badly affected in a flight to Mexico - had to be repaired by Sony - replacing the CCD chips for a cost of around 5,000 UKP. Most of the big pro tv cameras have an abillity to map out any affected pixels - an extended black balance identifies the pixels. The problem is, a bad hit can leave the camera unable to map out a pixel - leaving a burned white spot (hot pixel) in the image all the time.

Have no idea whether any digital stills camera has the same ability but I doubt it at the consumer end of the market at least.

And insurance cover may be an issue.

Of course, if it was a common problem...you'd have heard of it already.

My Nikon D70 has travelled the world with me for the last 18 months (5 continents and more countries than I can remember - some 28 airline flights in the last 4 months alone) and hasn't suffered any ill effects...

David
...wondering what all those rays have done to my brain...

[Avotius]

thats interesting, my canon 20D has been on....8 plane trips and never had a problem, what is the cosmic ray bussiness anyway?

[Pherdinand]

Use film. :P

[Sparrow]

The Hubble Telescope’s sensors are still working normaly after how many years? Seems like a manufacturers excuse to me

[rxmd]

The Hubble Telescope’s sensors are still working normaly after how many years?

Hubble is slightly more radiation hardened than your average Leica M8.

Also, Hubble's Wide Field and Planetary camera was swapped in 1993. Another replacement was scheduled for 2004, but was cancelled due to the grounding of the Space Shuttle fleet and is now unlikely to take place. Hubble's Faint Object Camera was swapped for the Advanced Camera for Surveys in 2002.

Philipp

[Sparrow]

I was thinking of the CCDs on the optical array, and they have to take the lens cap however much its hardened.

[DavidH]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

The Hubble Telescope’s sensors are still working normaly after how many years? Seems like a manufacturers excuse to me

Actually NASA have spent a lot of money and time investigating the dangers to their space borne gear...some of their recent research on HD cameras in orbit puts their life expectancy during active periods at around 9 days...how they get around the problem I don't know.

It's a couple of years since I read anything on it but I did ask questions at the time - when you get an invoice for thousands and a bloke giving his routine - intake-of-breath, head shake, "yeah well...cosmic space rays mate..." - you tend to find a sudden interest.

But even if you were very unlucky and got a dead pixel in a stills camera, Photoshop would fix it in an instant. It's only really a problem for moving pictures - 25 or 30 per second over hours/days worth of footage.

It is a genuine phenomenon...but really, really not worth worrying about with regards digital stills cameras.

David

[Sparrow]

Sorry David, I have an odd sense of humour, clearly demonstrated by my posts here. I was just poking genial fun at the more earnest members; it is a character flaw on my part
Regards

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

I was thinking of the CCDs on the optical array, and they have to take the lens cap however much its hardened.

Hubble is a mirror telescope. You can harden mirrors all the way. The CCDs don't have to sit with a direct view path to open space.

Radiation hardening is a big problem in space. If anything, this underlines that statements about cosmic radiation being a danger for camera equipment are true.

Incidentally, Hubble's ACS camera has been dead for three weeks at the moment, though probably not due to CCD failure.

Philipp

[jaapv]

Originally Posted by Pherdinand

Use film. :P

And get it slammed by airport x-rays..

[DavidH]

No offence taken at all...I appreciate your humour

The funniest part of the whole episode for me was that Virgin Atlantic's only inflight movie to Mexico City was 'Man on Fire' - a story of violence, murder and kidnap...in Mexico City...
Luckily, only the camera got toasted.

David

[Sparrow]

Philipp
I stand corrected, and reassured that Leica have considered every aspect of operation, it's good to have the disclaimer so soon

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

reassured that Leica have considered every aspect of operation,

Sadly, no M8s to boldly go where Hasselblad has gone before.

Philipp

[Sparrow]

NASA probably still have the Nikon kit left over as well, so at least they have something that will work for now.
Interesting edit you made there.

[kepstein]

Originally Posted by DavidH

Most of the big pro tv cameras have an abillity to map out any affected pixels - an extended black balance identifies the pixels. The problem is, a bad hit can leave the camera unable to map out a pixel - leaving a burned white spot (hot pixel) in the image all the time.

Have no idea whether any digital stills camera has the same ability but I doubt it at the consumer end of the market at least.

The Epson RD-1 has the ability to map out bad pixels.

[Abbazz]

Originally Posted by Pherdinand

Use film. :P

Cosmic rays can also adversely affect film. And there is no way to protect the stock in your freezer against those radiations (see this thread).

Cheers,

Abbazz

[jlw]

Originally Posted by DavidH

Most of the big pro tv cameras have an abillity to map out any affected pixels - an extended black balance identifies the pixels...Have no idea whether any digital stills camera has the same ability but I doubt it at the consumer end of the market at least.

The firmware update for the Epson R-D 1 included a bad-pixel-mapping feature, and my Olympus C4040 point-and-shoot has it too. On the other hand, my Nikon D100 does not. Those are the only digital cameras I have handy for examination.

It would be interesting if some print or online publication could do an authoritative survey to find out (1) how big a problem this is, if any, and (2) if it's a problem, which cameras have a feature to address it and which don't.

Of course, even if you can map out bad pixels, you still lose their ability to contribute to the image, so that's not a perfect solution -- but it's better than no solution.

Film isn't immune to this problem, either -- I recall reading a Kodak publication warning not to rely on T-Max P3200 film after its marked expiration date, even if it's been kept in a freezer, because its high sensitivity makes it susceptible to fogging by cosmic rays.

I don't travel by air very much (the earth's atmosphere dissipates most of the energy of cosmic rays, so they don't have much effect on the ground) so I'm not too worried -- but if I traveled by air a lot and were about to invest in an expensive digital camera, I guess I'd want to know whether this was going to be a potential issue.

For that matter, I wonder if the high-energy scanners now used to inspect most checked luggage might also be able to knock out a pixel or two occasionally...

[jaapv]

Originally Posted by Abbazz

Cosmic rays can also adversely affect film. And there is no way to protect the stock in your freezer against those radiations (see this thread).

Cheers,

Abbazz

You could put your freezer in an old mineshaft two miles down.....

[Sparrow]

Ya……. but what about neutrinos

[jlw]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

Ya……. but what about neutrinos

They're pretty good with milk, sugar, and sliced bananas.