Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:08:41 -0700 From: Kent Stewart <kstewart@urx.com> To: Leland <lsp3@gte.net> Cc: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@osd.bsdi.com>, wyrdwulf@catskill.net, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: digital camera Message-ID: <3B058149.D60A5D27@urx.com> References: <200105180150.f4I1ovS17332@mail-1.catskill.net><003601c0df57$813bc2a0$44a4a518@we.mediaone.net> <20010517222006W.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> <003401c0dfcb$98221720$44a4a518@we.mediaone.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Leland wrote: > > > Though nowhere near as easy to use as Digital cameras. You still need > > to send the film off to be developed and then you'd better have a good > > scanner if you want the resulting images to look any good. I wouldn't > > even bother with that approach - whenever we get my girlfriend's > > pictures back (she's hopelessly wedded to the analog), we just get it > > on PhotoCD as well. > > But much better than you would get with a digital camera. Not with the 3mp cameras. Most of the photo CD's that I got were less than 1024x768. I have a friend with one of the newer 3 megapixel cameras and that is a cleaner image than I can scan off of 35mm prints. Of course, scans from prints from my 6cm x 6cm aren't in the same game as digital cameras. You would need a 60 megapixel source to compare. Kent > > > > A cheap film camera and a scanner is still a better deal. > > > > > > > I'm thinking of finally getting a digital camera. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA mailto:kbstew99@hotmail.com http://kstewart.urx.com/kstewart/index.html FreeBSD News http://daily.daemonnews.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B058149.D60A5D27>