digital cameras

From: Sellam Ismail <>
Date: Thu Jul 15 22:26:17 1999

On Fri, 16 Jul 1999, Tony Duell wrote:

> 'Fantastic Pictures' tells me nothing. Have you attempted to measure the
> resolution? If so, how?

"Fantastic" being that when you look at the picture you can see the same
detail on a computer screen as you'd get from a scanned photo. As far as
I'm concerend, that's good enough.
> Because they're convenient? No film to buy, you can erase your mistakes,
> you can stick the results in a computer document or on a web page, etc.

Exactly, and that's why they are useful. In a few years, this argument
will be moot as the digital cameras coming out will impress even you.

> Err... You do realise that's the equivalent of about 4 or 5 lines per
> milimeter on an equivalent 35mm frame. And that the _worst_ SLR lens than
> one of the major UK photographic magazines ever tested gave something
> like 40 lines/mm. And that was noticeably unsharp...

If I can see the detail of the structures I've taken pictures of in the
tiny 1" x 1" viewfinder then they should come out just fine on a 15" or
17" monitor.

Sellam Alternate e-mail:
Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.

             Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0!
                   See for details!
                        [Last web site update: 05/25/99]
Received on Thu Jul 15 1999 - 22:26:17 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:32:12 BST