RE: Digital Cameras

["Phillip Harris" <phillip.harris1@xxxxxxx>]

Who are you calling a geek!

Doesn't everyone have a 120lb CRT projector strapped to their ceiling along
with a 6ft wide electric screen lurking up there too? Doesn't every living
room have more speakers than furniture? Doesn't every house have a 10/100
network with internet and print servers?

Surely every home has a Pronto at least?

Oh oh ... here come the men in white coats to take me away again.

YEEEEESSS, YEEEEEEEESSSSSS!! Oh how I revel in my geekdom! The purity of
absolute geek.





-----Original Message-----
From: Timothy Morris [mailto:timothy.morris@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 1:58 PM
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: [ukha_d] Digital Cameras




-----Original Message-----
From: Phillip Harris [mailto:phillip.harris1@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 06 January 2001 05:30
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] RE: (ukha_d) OT Was scan, now Digital cameras


The only thing that I dislike about Epson printers is that in my experience
they tend to sound as though someone is breaking a wad of bamboo over their
knee when you power them up. When I go back to see my parents and they run
up their PC I keep thinking that their printers suddenly broken!
I don't actually own an Epson, I've got an HP 2000C, but the reviewers seem
to like them.


There's always the Olympus P400 if you want good quality prints at up to A4
size! *grin*

I've got a Canon Powershot S20, which captures at 2048x1536, so at 200
pixels per inch works out at 10.24x7.68 - they look great!

I do agree though that it is great to play around with your own images and
print your own photos ... however I'm not so concerned with longevity of
prints as if a picture fades a bit then you can always reprint it and when
you do it'll almost always be on a newer printer and so look better (all
being well).

The online printers are quite superb now ... I use one (Photobox I think)
to
print some photos taken at a family friends 50th birthday barbecue and
another batch from my mother-and-father-in-law-to-be's 40th wedding
anniversary dinner (including an 8 x 10 blowup) and on the regular prints
you would never know they were not from a regular camera - only if you look
closely does the lack of shadow detail and true depth of field give away
their non-35mm origins.

My brother runs an ad agency and he loves the flexibility of digital, but
he
agrees at the moment it doesn't capture the light as well as (medium
format)
film. There is an interesting review by a pro on the dpreview site
comparing
the new Canon D30 with the 35mm equivalent, and it scores well.
Even on the 8 x 10 blowup I'm not convinced that I
can see a pixel structure ... most people would never even suspect that it
wasn't anything other than 35mm.

And at 22p a print for the standard size pics ... well, I don't think I can
print them out at home for that price!
I'll give them a try.
I know that this isn't strictly HA, but we're all geeks at heart :)
Tim.