----- Original Message ----- From: Austin Franklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 3:14 PM Subject: RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/commercial photography > > > "...The digital camera gives you only 6M*8bit/channel=6Mbytes..." > > 6Mpixels *8bits/channel *3channels = 144Mbytes. This assumes 3 bytes/pixel > > it may be higher if bit deepth per channel is greater than 8. > > Bob Wright > > Er, no. That would be 144M BITS, not bytes, which is 24M Bytes... > Mea coupa! But still greater than 6 Mbytes.
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Laurie Solomon
- Re: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... RogerMillerPhoto
- Re: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Karl Schulmeisters
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Austin Franklin
- Re: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - weddi... Arthur Entlich
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Robert Meier
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - weddi... Austin Franklin
- Re: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Robert E. Wright
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Robert E. Wright
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Austin Franklin
- Re: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Robert Meier
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Robert Meier
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Robert Meier
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Austin Franklin
- Re: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - wedding/co... Karl Schulmeisters
- RE: filmscanners: film vs. digital cameras - weddi... Austin Franklin