History of Digital Imaging

I am seeking information and direction about any and all historical

references related to the development of photography and digital

imaging technology. My ideal starting point begins with

correspondance between William Henry Fox Talbot (photography and

pos/neg process) and Charles Babbage (analytical machine/father of

computing). That photography and computing "started" with these

important primary players and their processes so close to one

another is not just interesting but also important historically.

 

Any insights/websites to add?

Computers are not necessarily digital. Charles Babage�s computing machine was an analog mechanical, machine. Analog computers, based on electronics were used into at least the 1960�s. Digital imaging, as in the image being converted into a digital format of 1�s and 0�s, probably has its roots in space exploration. Sending images back from satellites from long distances, with low power transmitters, benefits from error correcting codes and variable bit rate. Development benefited from large amount of money being available (once upon a time) for the space program.

Good observation--of course both photography and computing were analog

in the early 19th century, but both are also digital now in the very early 21st

century. How we got from "there" to "here" is the stuff I'm interested in; that

there was ANY connection early on is pretty interesting, where each process

evolved and then reconnected relates to my overarching question.

Given the processing requirements of imaging and the price of bitmap display devices, I believe much of the development in the 50's, 60's and 70's was fueled by the US military and the space program, so that might be a starting point.

My (possibly highly irrelevant) two bits.

 

Check out the early history of the fax machine (patents in the late 19th c.), radiophoto and other technologies for wireless picture transmission (1930s to 1960s), and the NASA Surveyor missions to Mars. A number of earlier satellites used ejectable film pods (caught by pursuit planes) but I vaguely remember reading in the mid-1960s that the Mars pictures circa 1964/65 were the first digitally transmitted pix.

A major contributor to the underlying technology is the engineering field of <b>remote sensing</b>. My personal introduction to the many aspects of digital imaging were developed in this context. This is because the digitization of remotely sensed data along with the advent of massively powerful machines like the PDP-11s (old very slow mainframes) began allowing people to have computers find optimized solutions to engineering problems. <p>

 

A simple example is where to build a highway to minimize cost and environmental damage. You can begin with arial (sic) photography to develop elevation maps through photogrametry. You can use near-IR photographs to develop vegetation maps (perhaps multiple shots across seasons and times of day). This can then all be combined with reasonable models in a computer to solve the main problem. To accomplish such feats many analog techniques had to be adapted. This topic also ties into the topic of <b>GIS</b> (<b>G</b>eographic <b>I</b>nformation <b>S</b>ystems). <p>

 

Another major topic that contributed to the development of current digital photography and digital darkroom techniques is the field of <b>computer vision</b>. Many thousands of algorithms were developed in pursuit of such and they have many uses outside of that arena. <p>

 

Another major topic is (digital) <b>image processing</b> which has also contributed many thousands of algorithms. <p>

 

Another major topic is <b>mathematics</b> which provides the logical underpinnings of many algorithms. <b>Computer science</b> as noted also provides many of the logical underpinnings too. And in the land between computer science and mathematics with a dash of chemistry tossed in lies the area that underpins the correlations between wet chemistry imaging and digital photos. Because when you get down to it, wet chemistry imagings is digital. It just happens that the digits in wet chemistry are discrete physical molecules as opposed to discrete values that are averages of rectangular areas. This is something that requires a solid background and theoretical mathematics, a basic background in chemistry, and a broad knowledge of imaging technology to realize. It amazes me how many people who have no idea what they are talking about say digital images are not real when they know next to nothing about tyhe optics of image formation and how digital and celluloid film methods both do the same thing. It is almost a bad as the foolish people who see aliens when they get lens flare in their photos (the <i>orbs</i> phenomenon). <p>

 

Beyond that there is the study of human vision and color perception in both engineering, biological, and psychological contexts that underly much of <b>color theory</b> and <b>CMS</b> ( <b>C</b>olor <b>M</b>anagement <b>S</b>ystems ). <p>

 

There is also the engineering and physics topics that underly the design and implementation of digital imaging sensors. <p>

 

This should give you a reasonable set of <b>search terms</b> to use to begin some research. Or if you would prefer more input, then please send me an email and I would be happy to expand on these topics. <p>

 

hope this helps, <p>

 

Sean

There was a very similar question a year ago, with a few answers: <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004oab">http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004oab</a>

Wow, thanks Sean. Feel free to email anything of interest to al_wildey@yahoo.com.

 

Anything else anyone?

On a related issue - comparing (what became) film and digital: I think that one can make good comparisons between the decline of the daguerreotype process and the ultimate adoption of the negative positive process.

 

Given good light, and in broad terms, the former continued to offer greater definition. But the negative - positive process ultimately offered greater flexibility and could be much more easily reproduced. Hence that process was generally adopted and rapidly improved.

 

Similarly we now see digital capture being adopted since in most cases it is a more flexible process. Despite the obvious advantages of many film formats.

 

As toning (for example) was developed to overcome some of the limitations of the negative - positive process ... so we see various techniques being used now to overcome some of the limitations of digital capture.

 

Certainly there are many analogies.

Can anyone identify the first digital image of a photographic nature (portrait? architecture? landscape?)

 

Anyone know who the first person to create said digital image was? (I'm thinking along the lines of Niepce/Daguerre/Talbot/Archer--all important early practioners of significant processes).