Most people think what the obvious evidence suggests. On Oct 7, 2006, at 6:20 PM, mike wilson wrote:
> Perry Pellechia wrote: > >> My point is that a decades ago people were saying digital cameras >> would never replace film. I do not think most people feel this way >> today. Read this story about the first digital image recorded by >> Kodak R&D labs 30 years ago: > > Most people think whatever the promotional departments of large > corporations tell them to think. If most people today feel that > digital > has replaced film how come, from the same article, "....film, which > still accounts for the bulk of its profits...."? > >> >> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9261340/ >> >> Quoting from the article: >> "The image took 23 seconds to record onto the cassette and another 23 >> seconds to read off a playback unit onto a television. Then it popped >> up on the screen." >> >> Based on your logic they should have given up because this was not >> practical. > > It wasn't and they did. Modern digital picture technology bears > little > resemblance to that. > >> >> >> On 10/7/06, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> I don't think there was ever much progress made by letting the >>> technology do the leading, whatever that means. This particular >>> instance seems to encompass the worst of all worlds. Multiple (it >>> doesn't say how many but I get the impression of many) moveable >>> mirrors, >>> one pixel and an exposure time of, at the moment, 15 minutes, >>> that they >>> expect to get down to "a few seconds". >>> >>> What happens if your single pixel goes "hot"? >>> >> >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
