> > This isn't meant as a flame either. But if we return to classic computers
> > for the moment, I've not seen a digital photo of _anything_ on a web page
> > that I consider useful. Scanned in diagrams, sure. But the average photo
> > of a classic computer doesn't have the resolution to read all the labels
> > on the case, let alone work out what the circuit boards or chips are.
> Ummm... OK, I'll take that challenge. How much bandwidth DO you have? My
> camera is easily capable of capturing images at this level. If you really
> want to read the IC numbers and resistor color codes, I've got the space to
> post it.
Now, we're drifted into the middle of nowhere - The original question
was what kind of camera to use to get classic comp pics. Throughout
the discusion it's clear that, unless you use a USD 20.000,- camera,
there is no solution to fit all needs (May I point back to the A-F
solutions ?). Fact is that most digital cameras ara just good
to take an overview snapshoot to give a basic idea, but allone
the difference between a C64 and C64G ist not visible (not to
speak of the differenve between an AT and an AT386).
> But honestly, how many 2+MB images are you (or anyone else for that matter)
> going to download? And what type of content are you looking for that would
> be considered "useful"?
Any amount (got still some unused DAT tapes :).
Take again the B500 example ... the enlagement.
> <BG> 'Real world'... (that amusing qualification since part of what I do
> in 'real life' is web design) seems to want 'eye candy' and quick page load
> times. So... until everyone is universally blessed with multi-MB/Sec
> connections, we continue the search for the mythical 'happy medium'.
Well, real life ? whats that ?
:))
H.
--
Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
Received on Mon Jul 19 1999 - 12:19:04 BST