i took a one day photo workshop today. the guy shoots large format 4x5 and
scans his slides at 8000 dpi, the optical resolution of his scanner.
anything less, he says, and he loses quality that he can tell on his
exhibition prints, now of which are less than 8x10 inches. he also said
that for the
no, i mean 4x5 inch format slides at 8000 dpi at 16-bits/channel color
depth. he has four 120GB drives he uses for his working storage and
downconverts to 8 bits/channel enough so that one Photoshop image fits on a
single CD for archiving purposes.
Great Scott! The world's gone mad :-)
Cot
Is that true, that digital prints made using those type of printers can now
outlast regular prints made at a photo lab?
Pretty much. There are a number of variables and unknowns:
1. Digital print LE (life expectancy) is a function of the ink/paper
combination, not just one or the other.
2.
Hi Boris,
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:51:00 +0200, Boris Liberman wrote:
Both you and Doug scan at 4000 dpi resulting in roughly 24 MP files.
So no matter which DSLR you were to choose from available today, you
will be getting at most half of the pixels you usually get.
Well, that's true, but
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I wouldn't be surprised if Canon had similar ratings on some of their
newest printers. Although Epson is the leader, the others are working
hard to catch up.
Bruce
competition is good, in this case. the 2200 is in my sights for an upgrade
to my
I would guess he is refering to drum scans.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: Jan van Wijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 7:15 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR: e-mail from Pentax USA
Hi Herb
On Sat
Hi!
RS I would guess that anyone here who is critical of quality would be keen to
RS acquire a Pentax K mount 11MP DSLR (or better), lager files mean more
RS flexibility WRT post image manipulation and print sizes.
Well, this is a valid point. I think I'd ask some questions to collect
some
Hi!
JvW Right, plus the fact that it might be full frame.
JvW In that case the 11mp would be ideal as primary camera, including (ultra)
wide-angle
JvW and the cheaper, older APS-sized-sensor camera would be a good backup body and
JvW perfect for tele-shots as well ...
I agree on the first.
: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:43 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR: e-mail from Pentax USA
On 8 Jan 2003 at 17:24, Dr E D F Williams wrote:
It does not matter how noisy a signal is, if the information is there it
can be
retrieved
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:44:51 EST, you wrote:
snip
How soon, if ever, will a Pentax DSLR become
available?
That's my worry - Pentax announces their DSLR, then drags their feet
making it available for sale becuse it may or may not be fully
engineered. Pentax' alleged mid-summer availability puts
On 9 Jan 2003 at 11:30, Boris Liberman wrote:
The ultimate result of camera+lens+photographer is photograph. Again,
unless you're serious professional (such as Michael Reichmann of
Luminous Landscape), you will keep getting excellent photos with the
equipment you have. That for example would
Hi Jtodd19261,
on 09 Jan 03 you wrote in pentax.list:
stuff out way too early. How soon, if ever, will a Pentax DSLR become
available?
I don't know, but for the Optio S they say that it is available within 2
or 4 weeks. I think that this is the only way to sell digital cameras -
be fast. I
On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 23:21:39 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
The ultimate result of camera+lens+photographer is photograph. Again,
unless you're serious professional (such as Michael Reichmann of
Luminous Landscape), you will keep getting excellent photos with the
equipment you have. That for
Jan van Wijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 23:21:39 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
The ultimate result of camera+lens+photographer is photograph. Again,
unless you're serious professional (such as Michael Reichmann of
Luminous Landscape), you will keep getting excellent photos with
On 9 Jan 2003 at 7:57, Mark Roberts wrote:
According to what I've read, any 10+ megapixel camera is likely to be
full-frame because at that point the pixel density of the sensor is starting to
exceed the resolution capabilities of lenses; there'd be no practical benefit in
going to 10
Hi,
do you know the price of Limited 43/1.9 and PZ-1p if available in your country (in $
please).
Alek
Uytkownik Iren Henry Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa:
Dear all,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's ironic is the fact that Canon can't keep up with demand on the D60,
(try to findone in stock
True. Cropping room never hurts, and being able to print salon-sized for
shows and galleries would be a definite plus. I just hope I won't have to
pay $8K to get it. And, truthfully, It won't cost more than $2K, if prices
keep coming down. All I have to be able to do is wait for a while.
The important question
for digital is where this good enough line occurs for most folks, and
given a good price it could be lower than you think.
I have no desire at this stage to move on from 6 MP. The images are
stunning at this size and I see no reason to change.
Of course, I would also love
No, this is what DSPs are all about: extracting signal from noise. It's been done for
years all over the place.
BR
Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sorry, garbage in, garbage out. no amount of digital processing can
compensate for noise in the system, and nonlinearities in the analog
On 8 Jan 2003 at 8:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, this is what DSPs are all about: extracting signal from noise. It's been
done for years all over the place.
DSPs are great for applying dark noise offset, colour correction, matrix
transforms, sharpening, contrast control and jpg compression
Henry wrote:
How about a high-low combination on show in PMA2003:
1. 6mp D-SLR with sony APS-sized sensor on the MZ-S body, as promised by
Pentax earlier to be sold under US$1200 in Spring 2003.
They din't promise this camera built on the MZ-S chassis.
2. 10mp Foveon full-frame D-SLR
What's ironic is the fact that Canon can't keep up with demand on the D60,
(try to findone in stock anywhere) yet an entire year later they plan to
offer a D90? Who are they kidding. They put the stuff out before they make
them.
Very untrue. Canon have no problem making enough D60
Ryan wrote:
It's not well known to me... so do yo have a source? These product
lines are making money- my only source is a kodak person, and each
product has a business case behind it (and obviously this is w/o glass
revenue).
It is printed in every industry magazine or photo magazine
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, this is what DSPs are all about: extracting signal from noise. It's
been done for years all over the place.
BR
extracting a signal and extracting a smooth signal are two different
things. i've done a bit of digital image processing and
Unless I see a quoted reference on who makes mony from what, I assume it's bogus.
Everyone knows is a meaninless statement, unless someone can show where they got
their numbers. I also see facts extrapolated into fantasy. Things like: Nikon lost
money on the F3 in last few years of
Tom wrote:
Supposed to be a updated model digital. There is no information other than
it is in the works. So your guess is as good as anybodies. What would you
like it to be?
As Pentax have recently claimed that their digital camera will have a lifespan of six
months, it seems likely it is
on 08.01.03 15:17, Herb Chong at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, this is what DSPs are all about: extracting signal from noise. It's
been done for years all over the place.
BR
extracting a signal and extracting a smooth signal are two
Pentax is therefore again planning something obsolete before even it reach
the market.
*sigh*...
Let's wait to at least get a description of the product before drawing
Chicken-Little conclusions, shall we?
Sorry, but I get tired of these dire pronouncements based on speculations
about
/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR: e-mail from Pentax USA
On 8 Jan 2003 at 8:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Image processing can
be done in real time on an optical bench, but its more difficult.
Don
and that is the key. i can do all kinds of things with hours per image to
do the processing, huge amounts of memory, and stuff like that. have you
seen
DSLR sell so slowly and are so fast out of date
This phrase is a non-sequitur. It does not mean a thing. I bought a DSLR
a few months ago, and if it is superseded at the PMA, fine. I would not
consider mine to be 'out of date', whatever that means. Would one
consider a PZ-1, or an LX, or a
On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Cotty wrote:
a few months ago, and if it is superseded at the PMA, fine. I would not
consider mine to be 'out of date', whatever that means. Would one
consider a PZ-1, or an LX, or a Spotmatic 'out of date' right now? If it
Absolutely.
Well, sort of absolutely.
The
Maybe a few months isn't a big deal, but if you had purchased a digital
camera from the same era as the PZ-1, I think everyone would agree that it
is out of date!
t
On 1/8/03 11:37 AM, Cotty wrote:
DSLR sell so slowly and are so fast out of date
This phrase is a non-sequitur. It does not
I assume product life. As opposed to the LX which had a product life of
oh about 20 years. Digital technology is changing so quickly...
Useable lifetime will be much longer. My question is if the cameras themselves
last 20 years will there still be consumables available for them.
At 07:29 PM
On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Timothy Sherburne wrote:
Maybe a few months isn't a big deal, but if you had purchased a digital
camera from the same era as the PZ-1, I think everyone would agree that it
is out of date!
My Casio QV-10a is out of date? But.. its got 320x240 resolution pictures!
--
Hi,
Wednesday, January 8, 2003, 2:22:34 PM, you wrote:
Unless I see a quoted reference on who makes mony from what, I assume it's bogus.
Everyone
knows is a meaninless statement, unless someone can show where they got their
numbers.
I also see facts extrapolated into fantasy. Things like:
Well if you don't include the F/ES mount you can still buy new lenses
for the Spotmatic, just not from pentax.
Service is still available from Pentax, for the LX.
The PZ1p is still listed as a current model on the Pentax USA web site as of
yesterday.
Each of these are still usable, as
Totally true, Cotty.
I bought my Epson PhotoPC 1.3 M-pixel camera rather early in the game.
Paid a fair amount for it, I did, compared to what one gets today,
but...I have enjoyed the heck out of it! It seems to ME like it gives
me 3 megapixel images, because for whatever reason they look
Well, I guess I should rephrase my initial comment: if you have an
application that can make good use of older technology, then that technology
isn't out of date.
I have an old Connectix Quick Cam that I don't use anymore because I want
features and a level of quality over what it has to offer.
On 8 Jan 2003 at 17:24, Dr E D F Williams wrote:
It does not matter how noisy a signal is, if the information is there it can be
retrieved. In Electron Microscopy the images are often terribly noisy. For
ordered structures Fourier transforms, rotational symmetry, or a combination of
methods
I said extrascting signal from noise, not making up information that doesn't exist.
BR
Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DSPs are great for applying dark noise offset, colour correction, matrix
transforms, sharpening, contrast control and jpg compression to digital data
sets derived
On 8 Jan 2003 at 19:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I said extrascting signal from noise, not making up information that doesn't
exist.
It's all about the sensors:
http://www.kodak.com/global/plugins/acrobat/en/digital/ccd/papersArticles/ultima
teSensor.pdf
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I said extrascting signal from noise, not making up information that
doesn't exist.
BR
an image that becomes recognizable as a dog after processing doesn't mean
that it is of sufficient quality to be useful as an ordinary photograph.
you may
Regardless, the S/N ratio defines the ultimate dynamic range of the photo.
R
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I said extrascting signal from noise, not making up information that doesn't exist.
BR
Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DSPs are great for applying dark noise offset, colour
Every camera shop in America, except Smile in NY (who is asking $250 more
than retail) is out of stock. Apparently Hong Kong has plenty, though. The
sales person at Smile told me Can** was increasing their price by 15% on the
D60 soon, and told me to buy their 'last one'. I think a D90 is
Alan,
Wow, I'm not of that opinion at all. If Pentax users wanted an array of
expensive zooms they would own Nikon, Canon, or Minolta instead. Pentax made
a choice long ago to stick with sharp prime lenses and only do cheaper
consumer zooms (ignoring the FA28-70/2.8 and FA 80-200/2.8).
on 07.01.03 8:17, Alan Chan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you ask me, I'd say what Pentax need is an array of high quality consumer
zooms, which have never been the strength of Pentax systems. Canon, Minolta
and Nikon have been offering and selling these zooms for many years, and
that's what
--- Peter Jansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's hope the price of D100 D60 won't be
dropping
so fast it killed the Pentax again. :(
Peter, at current retail prices, only the stores are
making money. Manufacturers like Canon, Nikon and
what not loose money on DSLR. Price drops are common
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
However, these things will improve, but I think the
CCD device is just a piece of hardware in a digital
camera, like a shutter block to a zoom compact.
Everybody uses shutter blocks made by Seiko, but do
these shutter blocks made better pictures
Rick Diaz wrote:
--- Peter Jansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's hope the price of D100 D60 won't be
dropping
so fast it killed the Pentax again. :(
Peter, at current retail prices, only the stores are
making money. Manufacturers like Canon, Nikon and
what not loose money on DSLR.
Do
Actually I have no plan to buy DSLR yet. However, if the coming Pentax DSLR
was shelfed again, I cannot imagine how many more bad things could happen to
Pentax. I certainly don't want to see Pentax losing too much ground, and
eventually out of business. :(
regards,
Alan Chan
Alan,
Are you
What's ironic is the fact that Canon can't keep up with demand on the D60,
(try to findone in stock anywhere) yet an entire year later they plan to
offer a D90? Who are they kidding. They put the stuff out before they make
them.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR: e-mail from Pentax USA
What's ironic is the fact that Canon can't keep up with demand
on the D60,
(try to findone in stock anywhere) yet an entire year later
they plan to
offer a D90? Who are they kidding
Do you have any data to back this up? It's a pretty bold statement that folks are putting this much RD into a product line and not making a profit. I'm sure Canon made something on the $8k I just gave them. What about the cost of not capturing market share?
This is a well known industry fact. Not
Dear all,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's ironic is the fact that Canon can't keep up with demand on the D60,
(try to findone in stock anywhere) yet an entire year later they plan to
offer a D90? Who are they kidding. They put the stuff out before they
make
them.
In fact, there are lot of
Perhaps they didn't expect the D60 was selling so well.
regards,
Alan Chan
What's ironic is the fact that Canon can't keep up with demand on the D60,
(try to findone in stock anywhere) yet an entire year later they plan to
offer a D90? Who are they kidding. They put the stuff out before they
If they can hit a lower price point it won't be obsolete.
At 02:03 PM 1/8/2003 +0800, you wrote:
Dear all,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's ironic is the fact that Canon can't keep up with demand on the D60,
(try to findone in stock anywhere) yet an entire year later they plan to
offer a D90?
Rick Diaz wrote:
Do you have any data to back this up? It's a pretty bold statement that
folks are putting this much RD into a product line and not making a
profit. I'm sure Canon made something on the $8k I just gave them.
What about the cost of not capturing market share?
This is a well
I tried to post this over the weekend, but for some reason it would not go
through, maybe this time.
Leak from my usual source.
Pentax will introduce a 6mp Digital SLR using their existing K mount
lenses at PMA in March. It will compete with the D100, D60 etc but sell for
less. There has been no
Pentax will introduce a 6mp Digital SLR using their existing K mount
lenses at PMA in March. It will compete with the D100, D60 etc but sell for
less. There has been no mention of it using a full-size chip, nor will it
use Fovean technology. The new DSLR should be on the dealers' shelves by
Let's hope the price of D100 D60 won't be dropping so fast it killed the
Pentax again. :(
regards,
Alan Chan
Very likely as there are rumours that Canon will release D90 in the coming
PMA
Regards,
Henry Chu
_
MSN 8 helps
This one time, at band camp,
Iren Henry Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's hope the price of D100 D60 won't be dropping so fast it killed the
Pentax again. :(
well, at 6mp this is a bit disappointing, I hope there is a 'pro' version
available, but at least it is a starting point.
Kevin
Let's hope the price of D100 D60 won't be dropping
so fast it killed the Pentax again. :(
What killed the Pentax was the lousy 6 MP Phillips
chip. Contax used it look at the results: a
disaster. Thankfully Pentax pulled it. Now that
technology chip quality is much better cheaper, it
should
If you ask me, I'd say what Pentax need is an array of high quality consumer
zooms, which have never been the strength of Pentax systems. Canon, Minolta
and Nikon have been offering and selling these zooms for many years, and
that's what most people wanted. But Pentax just stay with low quality
64 matches
Mail list logo
