Ditto.
Frank Paris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Viacheslav
> Zilberfayn
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:12 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits?
>
>
> Paragraph is clear enough for me to understand. And is perfectly
> correct to my judgement.
>
> Slava
>
> --- Austin Franklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > for
> > > a given sensitivity from the analog circuitry, changing the
> > > A/D won't make any difference to the density ranges
> > > that the analog circuitry resolves. It only increases the
> > > accuracy with which we read the range of analog values
> > > that the CCD *does* resolve.
> >
> > May be I'm slow today...but that paragraph is really unclear to me,
> > and I
> > know this stuff quite well. What exactly do you mean by 'for a given
> > sensitivity from the analog circuitry'? Sensitivity can describe
> > one of
> > many characteristics, so this seems ambiguous.
> >
> > Also, what do you mean by 'to the density ranges that the analog
> > circuitry
> > resolves'. The above paragraph seems to intermix (confuse) different
> > concepts/terms, and really comes across, at least to me, as not very
> > comprehdable. I don't think 'resolves' is the right word there.
> >
> > Also, 'analog values that the CCD *does* resolve'? Again, resolve
> > doesn't
> > really sound right here... The only thing in the described system
> > that is
> > 'resolved' is the A/D.
> >
>
>
> =====
> --- NOTE: EMAIL HAS CHANGED !!! ---------------------
> Slava Zilberfayn | Home +1(416)7838430 | Work +1(416)5931122x2486
> EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ADDRESS: appt 1219, 377 Ridelle ave, M6B1K2, Toronto, ON, CANADA
>
> _______________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca
