Re: digital photography
- To: Multiple recipients of list <i*@rt66.com>
- Subject: Re: digital photography
- From: "* L* <d*@ilinks.net>
- Date: Sat, 15 Mar 1997 10:46:34 -0700 (MST)
Not to pound a dead subject farther under, but... I guess I will anyway.
I am by trade a computer artist. The low quality of digital cameras is only
more shocking than the high price. For the time I would highly suggest
using a Snappy or one of the cheaper equivalents. If you are satisfied with
the low quality of a digital camera, you will be pleased with Snappy's
quality and (in particular) price. This technology has a long way to go.
There is a bit of misunderstanding on resolution & dpi. They aren't the
same thing!!!!! The Snappy does NOT have a "dpi" rating. It scans at
various resolutions from 320x240 to 1500x1125. You could use it at 1500dpi
if you don't mind the image being one inch in size -- and it would look
great. At 72dpi it would about fill up a standard page, and look ugly. A
normal inkjet could output it at optimal resolution and you would have a 3"
image. There really is no way to assign a dpi rating to Snappy, since the
focal length of the camera determines how large an area goes into that 1500
pixels.
No one has asked, but as far as output goes -- Epson has a brand new
printer out. The Stylus 800 has 1400x720 dpi and is about $470 by mail. The
image quality is drop-dead spectacular. Personally I'm a Hewlett-Packard
printer fan, but HP doesn't have anything that comes close.
Back to reality. I have my first TB in the process of opening as I write,
and more on the way. Gorgeous sunshine and warm weather and a smile on my
face. Pictures coming soon!
David Lovegrove
www.ilinks.net/~dlovegrove
Atlanta, Georgia USA
