Photoshop How To Use: rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 8 topics

rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Interesting Site
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1f900bdd5a5240ce?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, May 2 2009 11:45 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-05-02 22:42:15 -0700, Me <user@domain.invalid> said:

> Savageduck wrote:
>> On 2009-05-02 21:23:27 -0700, Me <user@domain.invalid> said:
>>
>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>> John McWilliams wrote:
>>>>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>>>> On 2009-05-01 19:11:05 -0700, Dave Cohen <user@example.net> said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Take a look at this:
>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/6nnehk
>>>>>>> I don't know how it's done (suggestions welcome), but I thought it was
>>>>>>> quite impressive.
>>>>>>> Dave Cohen
>>>>>> Yup! A Flash multi-stitch, mulit-axis 360 horizontal & 180 vertical panorama.
>>>>>> This is similar to the technique used for the multi-stitch shot at the
>>>>>> Obama inauguration.
>>>>>> http://www.davidbergman.net/blog/2009/01/22/how-i-made-a-1474-megapixel-photo-during-president-obamas-inaugural-address/

My
broadband

was
>>>>>>
>>>>>> able to serve it up promptly, without the problems reported by others.
>>>>>> I can appreciate all of the issues related to Flash, but it works well
>>>>>> in my environment.
>>>>>
>>>>> Plays/displays just fine in Safari, Mac,. at least as far as navigation
>>>>> goes. Does not zoom in or out, dunno if it's supposed to.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here are the error messages that display at the bottom:
>>>>>
>>>>> NFO: registered to: julian kalmar
>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_closefs.jpg" failed
>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_up.jpg" failed
>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/fs.png" failed
>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_openfs.jpg" failed
>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_down.jpg" failed
>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_right.jpg" failed
>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_minus.jpg" failed
>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_left.jpg" failed
>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/plugins/options.swf" failed
>>>>>
>>>>> With all those 'failures', I am surprised I could navigate.
>>>>> Lovely work!
>>>>>
>>>> You might have better luck with the Mac version of Firefox.
>>>
>>> Try windows - a far more stable operating system.
>>> I only got a list of 2 errors :-)
>>> http://i43.tinypic.com/dy5f2v.jpg
>>
>> He made a funny!
> User Agent : Unison/1.8.1
> Wow - a Mac user who saw the smiley before launching in to "attack is
> the best defense" mode.

Some of the folks around here aren't playing the OS/Platform or
Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Pentax war game.
...and sometimes humor is detectable.

Now back to the issue at hand. When are you going to get a real computer?
--
Regards,
Savageduck

== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 12:26 am
From: Me

Savageduck wrote:
> On 2009-05-02 22:42:15 -0700, Me <user@domain.invalid> said:
>
>> Savageduck wrote:
>>> On 2009-05-02 21:23:27 -0700, Me <user@domain.invalid> said:
>>>
>>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>>> John McWilliams wrote:
>>>>>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2009-05-01 19:11:05 -0700, Dave Cohen <user@example.net> said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Take a look at this:
>>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/6nnehk
>>>>>>>> I don't know how it's done (suggestions welcome), but I thought
>>>>>>>> it was quite impressive.
>>>>>>>> Dave Cohen
>>>>>>> Yup! A Flash multi-stitch, mulit-axis 360 horizontal & 180
>>>>>>> vertical panorama.
>>>>>>> This is similar to the technique used for the multi-stitch shot
>>>>>>> at the Obama inauguration.
>>>>>>> http://www.davidbergman.net/blog/2009/01/22/how-i-made-a-1474-megapixel-photo-during-president-obamas-inaugural-address/
>>>>>>>
>
> My
> broadband
>
> was
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> able to serve it up promptly, without the problems reported by
>>>>>>> others.
>>>>>>> I can appreciate all of the issues related to Flash, but it works
>>>>>>> well in my environment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Plays/displays just fine in Safari, Mac,. at least as far as
>>>>>> navigation goes. Does not zoom in or out, dunno if it's supposed to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here are the error messages that display at the bottom:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> NFO: registered to: julian kalmar
>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_closefs.jpg" failed
>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_up.jpg" failed
>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/fs.png" failed
>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_openfs.jpg" failed
>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_down.jpg" failed
>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_right.jpg" failed
>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_minus.jpg" failed
>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_left.jpg" failed
>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/plugins/options.swf" failed
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With all those 'failures', I am surprised I could navigate.
>>>>>> Lovely work!
>>>>>>
>>>>> You might have better luck with the Mac version of Firefox.
>>>>
>>>> Try windows - a far more stable operating system.
>>>> I only got a list of 2 errors :-)
>>>> http://i43.tinypic.com/dy5f2v.jpg
>>>
>>> He made a funny!
>> User Agent : Unison/1.8.1
>> Wow - a Mac user who saw the smiley before launching in to "attack is
>> the best defense" mode.
>
> Some of the folks around here aren't playing the OS/Platform or
> Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Pentax war game.
> ...and sometimes humor is detectable.
>
> Now back to the issue at hand. When are you going to get a real computer?
>
I don't know - but soon...
I have Vista on one machine, XP on another really old machine (this
one). This is an old AMD Athlon with 3gb Ram and IDE drives running XP.
The other is a dual core pentium with 2gb ram and SATA drives running
Vista.
The (5 year) old machine runs faster doing most stuff than the new ( 1
year old) machine. That's what MS calls "progress". Go figure. Even
worse - it's an OEM install and I can't "downgrade" it to XP, and my XP
is OEM and I can't transfer it to the faster/slower machine.
I *hate* Vista. Almost every day there's been a new annoyance. Not big
issues on their own, and the OS itself seems quite stable, but combined
they add up to make it a complete pain in the arse.

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 12:45 am
From: "David J Taylor"

Me wrote:
[]
> I don't know - but soon...
> I have Vista on one machine, XP on another really old machine (this
> one). This is an old AMD Athlon with 3gb Ram and IDE drives running
> XP. The other is a dual core pentium with 2gb ram and SATA drives
> running Vista.
> The (5 year) old machine runs faster doing most stuff than the new ( 1
> year old) machine. That's what MS calls "progress". Go figure. Even
> worse - it's an OEM install and I can't "downgrade" it to XP, and my
> XP is OEM and I can't transfer it to the faster/slower machine.
> I *hate* Vista. Almost every day there's been a new annoyance. Not
> big issues on their own, and the OS itself seems quite stable, but
> combined they add up to make it a complete pain in the arse.

I have a mixture of Vista and XP here, and I've actually come to quite
like Vista. Perhaps I've been luck, but it's been stable and a pleasure
to work with. That's on a 3GB system, and you do seem to have things the
wrong way round by giving the newer OS less memory.

Perhaps if performance is an issue for you, Windows 7 may be an
improvement. There's a free release candidate which lasts for one year
available for general download on Tuesday.

Cheers,
David

== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 12:54 am
From: "Paul Bartram"

> "Me" <user@domain.invalid> wrote

> ...XP on another really old machine (this
one). This is an old AMD Athlon with 3gb Ram and IDE drives running XP.

Oh now you're making me feel depressed. My Athlon 64 only has 512 Mb of RAM.
Seems to work though, but I am definitely *not* going to try Vista on it!

Paul

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 2:04 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-05-03 00:26:10 -0700, Me <user@domain.invalid> said:

My
broadband

was

able
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> to serve it up promptly, without the problems reported by others.
>>>>>>>> I can appreciate all of the issues related to Flash, but it works well
>>>>>>>> in my environment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Plays/displays just fine in Safari, Mac,. at least as far as navigation
>>>>>>> goes. Does not zoom in or out, dunno if it's supposed to.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here are the error messages that display at the bottom:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> NFO: registered to: julian kalmar
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_closefs.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_up.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/fs.png" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_openfs.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_down.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_right.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_minus.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_left.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/plugins/options.swf" failed
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With all those 'failures', I am surprised I could navigate.
>>>>>>> Lovely work!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> You might have better luck with the Mac version of Firefox.
>>>>>
>>>>> Try windows - a far more stable operating system.
>>>>> I only got a list of 2 errors :-)
>>>>> http://i43.tinypic.com/dy5f2v.jpg
>>>>
>>>> He made a funny!
>>> User Agent : Unison/1.8.1
>>> Wow - a Mac user who saw the smiley before launching in to "attack is
>>> the best defense" mode.
>>
>> Some of the folks around here aren't playing the OS/Platform or
>> Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Pentax war game.
>> ...and sometimes humor is detectable.
>>
>> Now back to the issue at hand. When are you going to get a real computer?
> >
> I don't know - but soon...
> I have Vista on one machine, XP on another really old machine (this
> one). This is an old AMD Athlon with 3gb Ram and IDE drives running
> XP. The other is a dual core pentium with 2gb ram and SATA drives
> running Vista.
> The (5 year) old machine runs faster doing most stuff than the new ( 1
> year old) machine. That's what MS calls "progress". Go figure. Even
> worse - it's an OEM install and I can't "downgrade" it to XP, and my XP
> is OEM and I can't transfer it to the faster/slower machine.
> I *hate* Vista. Almost every day there's been a new annoyance. Not big
> issues on their own, and the OS itself seems quite stable, but combined
> they add up to make it a complete pain in the arse.

Well I have a collection of Macs (and buried somewhere is an Apple IIe
& a vintage 8088 steam driven device!)
My latest is a PowerBook Pro 2.93Ghz + 8 Gb. I am very happy with that.
I am planing to get a seperate monitor to use with the PB at my desk.

I used to have to use a Windows machine at work ( I have retired so
that problem is fixed) and have always been happy with my Mac-centric
home.
I have thought of getting emulation SW such as VMware or Parallels to
run Windows, or try a Bootcamp Windows partition, but I cannot think
why I would want to do that to my self.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 2:39 am
From: Eric Stevens

On Sun, 03 May 2009 19:26:10 +1200, Me <user@domain.invalid> wrote:

>Savageduck wrote:
>> On 2009-05-02 22:42:15 -0700, Me <user@domain.invalid> said:
>>
>>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>> On 2009-05-02 21:23:27 -0700, Me <user@domain.invalid> said:
>>>>
>>>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>>>> John McWilliams wrote:
>>>>>>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2009-05-01 19:11:05 -0700, Dave Cohen <user@example.net> said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Take a look at this:
>>>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/6nnehk
>>>>>>>>> I don't know how it's done (suggestions welcome), but I thought
>>>>>>>>> it was quite impressive.
>>>>>>>>> Dave Cohen
>>>>>>>> Yup! A Flash multi-stitch, mulit-axis 360 horizontal & 180
>>>>>>>> vertical panorama.
>>>>>>>> This is similar to the technique used for the multi-stitch shot
>>>>>>>> at the Obama inauguration.
>>>>>>>> http://www.davidbergman.net/blog/2009/01/22/how-i-made-a-1474-megapixel-photo-during-president-obamas-inaugural-address/
>>>>>>>>
>>
>> My
>> broadband
>>
>> was
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> able to serve it up promptly, without the problems reported by
>>>>>>>> others.
>>>>>>>> I can appreciate all of the issues related to Flash, but it works
>>>>>>>> well in my environment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Plays/displays just fine in Safari, Mac,. at least as far as
>>>>>>> navigation goes. Does not zoom in or out, dunno if it's supposed to.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here are the error messages that display at the bottom:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> NFO: registered to: julian kalmar
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_closefs.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_up.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/fs.png" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_openfs.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_down.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_right.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_minus.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_left.jpg" failed
>>>>>>> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/plugins/options.swf" failed
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With all those 'failures', I am surprised I could navigate.
>>>>>>> Lovely work!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> You might have better luck with the Mac version of Firefox.
>>>>>
>>>>> Try windows - a far more stable operating system.
>>>>> I only got a list of 2 errors :-)
>>>>> http://i43.tinypic.com/dy5f2v.jpg
>>>>
>>>> He made a funny!
>>> User Agent : Unison/1.8.1
>>> Wow - a Mac user who saw the smiley before launching in to "attack is
>>> the best defense" mode.
>>
>> Some of the folks around here aren't playing the OS/Platform or
>> Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Pentax war game.
>> ...and sometimes humor is detectable.
>>
>> Now back to the issue at hand. When are you going to get a real computer?
> >
>I don't know - but soon...
>I have Vista on one machine, XP on another really old machine (this
>one). This is an old AMD Athlon with 3gb Ram and IDE drives running XP.
> The other is a dual core pentium with 2gb ram and SATA drives running
>Vista.
>The (5 year) old machine runs faster doing most stuff than the new ( 1
>year old) machine. That's what MS calls "progress". Go figure. Even
>worse - it's an OEM install and I can't "downgrade" it to XP, and my XP
>is OEM and I can't transfer it to the faster/slower machine.
>I *hate* Vista. Almost every day there's been a new annoyance. Not big
>issues on their own, and the OS itself seems quite stable, but combined
>they add up to make it a complete pain in the arse.

I have a similar setup, except that Vista is on a laptop and Xtra is
on a loaded-for-bear Acer.

The laptop is ideal fo downloading my camera on a trip but then its a
nightmare to get things ot of the laptop to the Acer by means of the
home network. "You don't have permission to do that" the laptop
screams. Sometimes I think the problem is in the Vista of the laptop.
Othertimes I think it is in the XP of the Acer. On a couple of
occasions I have found that Panda anti-virus has objected to the RAW
files of my Nikon D300 as containing a horrible worm. Its almost
enough to drive me back to good old quarter-plate days.

Eric Stevens

== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 2:48 am
From: Neil Ellwood

On Sat, 02 May 2009 09:06:00 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:

> Savageduck wrote:
>> On 2009-05-01 19:11:05 -0700, Dave Cohen <user@example.net> said:
>>
>>> Take a look at this:
>>> http://tinyurl.com/6nnehk
>>> I don't know how it's done (suggestions welcome), but I thought it was
>>> quite impressive.
>>> Dave Cohen
>>
>> Yup! A Flash multi-stitch, mulit-axis 360 horizontal & 180 vertical
>> panorama.
>> This is similar to the technique used for the multi-stitch shot at the
>> Obama inauguration.
>> http://www.davidbergman.net/blog/2009/01/22/how-i-made-a-1474-
megapixel-photo-during-president-obamas-inaugural-address/
>>
>>
>> My
>> broadband was able to serve it up promptly, without the problems
>> reported by others.
>> I can appreciate all of the issues related to Flash, but it works well
>> in my environment.
>
> Plays/displays just fine in Safari, Mac,. at least as far as navigation
> goes. Does not zoom in or out, dunno if it's supposed to.
>
> Here are the error messages that display at the bottom:
>
> NFO: registered to: julian kalmar
> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_closefs.jpg" failed
> ERROR: loading plugin "flashutilities/buttons/btn_up.jpg" failed ERROR:
> loading plugin "flashutilities/fs.png" failed ERROR: loading plugin
> "flashutilities/buttons/btn_openfs.jpg" failed ERROR: loading plugin
> "flashutilities/buttons/btn_down.jpg" failed ERROR: loading plugin
> "flashutilities/buttons/btn_right.jpg" failed ERROR: loading plugin
> "flashutilities/buttons/btn_minus.jpg" failed ERROR: loading plugin
> "flashutilities/buttons/btn_left.jpg" failed ERROR: loading plugin
> "flashutilities/plugins/options.swf" failed
>
> With all those 'failures', I am surprised I could navigate. Lovely work!

Works with firefox in suse linux.

Neil
reverse ra and delete l
Linux user 335851

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 5:38 am
From: "J. Clarke"

David J Taylor wrote:
> Me wrote:
> []
>> I don't know - but soon...
>> I have Vista on one machine, XP on another really old machine (this
>> one). This is an old AMD Athlon with 3gb Ram and IDE drives running
>> XP. The other is a dual core pentium with 2gb ram and SATA drives
>> running Vista.
>> The (5 year) old machine runs faster doing most stuff than the new (
>> 1 year old) machine. That's what MS calls "progress". Go figure.
>> Even worse - it's an OEM install and I can't "downgrade" it to XP,
>> and my XP is OEM and I can't transfer it to the faster/slower
>> machine. I *hate* Vista. Almost every day there's been a new annoyance.
>> Not
>> big issues on their own, and the OS itself seems quite stable, but
>> combined they add up to make it a complete pain in the arse.
>
> I have a mixture of Vista and XP here, and I've actually come to quite
> like Vista. Perhaps I've been luck, but it's been stable and a
> pleasure to work with. That's on a 3GB system, and you do seem to
> have things the wrong way round by giving the newer OS less memory.
>
> Perhaps if performance is an issue for you, Windows 7 may be an
> improvement. There's a free release candidate which lasts for one
> year available for general download on Tuesday.

Moving an OEM copy is not all that difficult you know, as long as it's a
system builder copy and not one keyed to a specific brand of machine. If it
doesn't activate, just call Microsoft, give the automated system the code it
wants, if it doesn't take it you'll get a human, tell them that you blew
your motherboard and replaced it, and they'll generally give you an
activation code.

Technically speaking they can refuse activation on a motherboard
replacement, but I've never had them actually do it.

FWIW, I picked up a quad core Gateway for 700 bucks the other day from Best
Buy. It came with Vista Home Premium that I need to upgrade to Ultimate at
some point. I put Sun's Virtual Box on it and installed Linux in the box
and it runs Linux faster in the box than I've ever had it run natively on
anything else.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Highest Megapixels Possible in APS-Cs
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/b91b9724c6671278?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 2:13 am
From: Alfred Molon

In article <QGaqYXEIQL$JFwUx@kennedym.demon.co.uk>, Kennedy McEwen
says...

> Now, instead of uniform micro lenses, lets replace them with
> microprisms, or a highly chromatic microlenses, or even diffraction
> gratings - indeed, almost any systematic structure on the focal plane at
> this resolution, less than the wavelength of light, will produce spatial
> chromatic dispersion. Rather than separating the wavelength by
> penetration depth on the silicon, as with Foveon, you now have a spatial
> chromatic separation. All of the incident photons are captured and
> separated spatially by photon energy; wavelength; colour. Remember
> this is at a resolution well beyond anything the lens can achieve, so
> there is no spatial image content at this level. All photons are
> captured, all produce photoelectrons which are localised by wavelength
> at a resolution well in excess of optical resolutions.

Is it technically feasible to have a microprism for each separate pixel?
That would be 10-20 million microprisms, one per pixel. Seems impossible
to produce such a sensor. And the below silicon would need to have a
separate photodiode placed exactly where the split light beam is
arriving. Individual colour pixel capacity would also be very small. But
again I have my doubts it is possible to produce such a sensor.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 8:11 am
From: Kennedy McEwen

In article <MPG.24677e711420dfbf98bfcb@news.supernews.com>, Alfred Molon
<alfred_molon@yahoo.com> writes
>In article <QGaqYXEIQL$JFwUx@kennedym.demon.co.uk>, Kennedy McEwen
>says...
>
>> Now, instead of uniform micro lenses, lets replace them with
>> microprisms, or a highly chromatic microlenses, or even diffraction
>> gratings - indeed, almost any systematic structure on the focal plane at
>> this resolution, less than the wavelength of light, will produce spatial
>> chromatic dispersion. Rather than separating the wavelength by
>> penetration depth on the silicon, as with Foveon, you now have a spatial
>> chromatic separation. All of the incident photons are captured and
>> separated spatially by photon energy; wavelength; colour. Remember
>> this is at a resolution well beyond anything the lens can achieve, so
>> there is no spatial image content at this level. All photons are
>> captured, all produce photoelectrons which are localised by wavelength
>> at a resolution well in excess of optical resolutions.
>
>Is it technically feasible to have a microprism for each separate pixel?
>That would be 10-20 million microprisms, one per pixel. Seems impossible
>to produce such a sensor.

Yes, it must be totally impossible to produce a sensor with a crude
optical element for every pixel. That could never be done. Nikon,
Canon, Sony, Casio, Kodak, Panasonic they are all lying - Alfred Molon
says its impossible! I guess it never occurred to you that a prism is
even simpler than a microlens.

> And the below silicon would need to have a
>separate photodiode placed exactly where the split light beam is
>arriving. Individual colour pixel capacity would also be very small.

Once more - you really haven't got your head round this have you - the
small individual pixel capacity is the objective, not the problem! All
that matters is that you have approximately the same storage per unit
area as you have with current sensors, so that when the noise shaping
filter is applied you achieve the same dynamic range or better on the
optically matched downsampled images.

And another thing, I probably mentioned it in the original post, but it
hasn't come up since then: as you are sampling the image at far higher
resolution than the optical limit, there is no need for an anti-alias
filter. Similarly, the reconstruction filter needs no interpolation and
can have a spatial frequency response which is flat out to the Nyquist
limit of the sampling density. In fact, it can even have am MTF which
increases, to compensate to some extent for the optical MTF. As a
result, images will be significantly sharper - in a similar way that
images from a 20Mp sensor downsampled appropriately to 5Mp are far
sharper than images directly from any top of the range 5Mp sensor
available a few years ago.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: streaming Canon 300D with MLU firmware
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/6d474ed3ce37a659?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 1:40 am
From: "rda"

"lastico" <lasticoman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:813a3cb4-2e5a-4fb1-8130-514fef418871@v23g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
>
> 1. Is there a possibility of having video stream from the Canon 300D
> to a laptop so I can look at the laptop preview of object instead of
> the ViewFinder which can cause me eyestrain.
>
>
> 2. Is the Mirror Lock Up hacked firmware stable?
> Anyone using it for years without any problem?

I bought a 300D when they first were released and installed the Wasia
firmware soon after.
The camera now belongs to a friend and is still working perfectly. MLU
included.

--
rda

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Telephoto Picture & Technical Analysis
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/9003759f40db60ae?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 1:55 am
From: Chris Malcolm

In rec.photo.digital Pierre Vandevenne <pierre@datarescue.com> wrote:
> On May 1, 12:26?am, Hughes <eugenhug...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> What I have is the 100mm aperture Rubinar that is raw 1000mm
>> F/10. See:

> Ah, OK - well, in that case, there is another issue that comes into
> play: this is a catadioptric optic. That means that there is a central
> obstruction that will play a significant role. It will definitely have
> a negative impact on the contrast, at least compared to an
> unobstructed optical system of the same aperture. There are people
> here who have a much better understanding of optics than I have so I
> won't even attempt to go into the details.

There will be some effect due to the larger amount of diffraction
going on, but I would have thought that wouldn't produce a general
image-wide effect like loss of contrast. I've seen it suggested that
the lower contrast of these lenses is at least partly due to their
short fat shape, which makes them much more susceptible to light from
outside the field of view getting in and bouncing around and ending
up on the sensor. A long lens hood is often suggested as improving
contrast a lot.

--
Chris Malcolm

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 3:21 am
From: Hughes

On May 3, 4:55 pm, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> In rec.photo.digital Pierre Vandevenne <pie...@datarescue.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 1, 12:26?am, Hughes <eugenhug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> What I have is the 100mm aperture Rubinar that is raw 1000mm
> >> F/10. See:
> > Ah, OK - well, in that case, there is another issue that comes into
> > play: this is a catadioptric optic. That means that there is a central
> > obstruction that will play a significant role. It will definitely have
> > a negative impact on the contrast, at least compared to an
> > unobstructed optical system of the same aperture. There are people
> > here who have a much better understanding of optics than I have so I
> > won't even attempt to go into the details.
>
> There will be some effect due to the larger amount of diffraction
> going on, but I would have thought that wouldn't produce a general
> image-wide effect like loss of contrast. I've seen it suggested that
> the lower contrast of these lenses is at least partly due to their
> short fat shape, which makes them much more susceptible to light from
> outside the field of view getting in and bouncing around and ending
> up on the sensor. A long lens hood is often suggested as improving
> contrast a lot.
>
> --
> Chris Malcolm

Where did you read it suggested that off-axis
reflections is caused of contrast loss? I think
it's the following:

1. F/10. Even if you are using a Hubble with
F/10 sensor. You'd have the same amount of
light in the sensor. Canon are designed for
F/2.8-F/5.6. The photographers may not have
used slower shutter speed because they
can't take action shots. So fast shutter would
produce dim image.

2. The airy disc is made up of more than 10
airy disc. One half from the normal pixel
scale and the second from the fact that
light in the center of the airy discs is pumped
to the surrounding make it bigger.

Note that almost all Canon Telephoto used
in conjunction with any Canon DSLR would
have the airy disc inside one pixel. But when
you have airy disc that is made up of more
than 10 pixels. There must be contrast loss.

The above is my analysis of the problem after
thinking of it for weeks. I stand corrected by
others with better theory.

Hughes

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Canon PowerShot SX10 IS - any good?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/afb1d7a1a6711842?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 2:18 am
From: "Ken"

"Clair Johnston" <cbj0129@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:O42Ll.36274$v8.14800@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>
>>
>> Clair thanks for the informative I was beginning to have doubts but NOT
>> really as the movable LCD is something I had an old Olympus and miss. So
>> this feature alone is worth extra points.
>>
>> Ken
>
> Ken,
>
> If you decide to get the camera, let us know your thoughts after a
> reasonable period of use. Remember to read the manual to make full use of
> the camera.
>
> Clair

Since my first post I have now ordered one so!!!

I have used a bridge camera before so expect to get used to it fairly
quickly. I hope!!

Ken

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 2:20 am
From: "Ken"

I am also have been told the viewfinder is very good - best in its class and
I do like my viewfinder.

Ken

"Xxxxx" <Not_gonna_give@all.com> wrote in message
news:1E2Ll.4105$b11.2805@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>I have the SX10IS and an XSi (which I use with a Tamron 18-270 zoom). Both
>are great, but I bought the SX10IS because:
>
> 1. The 20x optical zoom is extremelly useful and a lot lighter/smaller
> than the XSi with the Tamron.
>
> 2. The SX10IS takes movies.
>
> 3. The movable LCD screen enables you to take candid pictures without the
> subject being aware as well as at odd angles. This can be useful when you
> don't want posed pictures or when there are very tall people standing in
> front of you blocking what you want to photograph.
>
> I use the smaller camera when I plan to be hiking for a long time and when
> focusing speed is not crucial (the PowerShots cannot compete with DSLRs
> for speed), or when I won't need manual focus. While the SX10IS can do
> manual focus, I find it awkward and have never gotten satisfactory results
> from it.
>
> For general photography, both cameras yield great pictures.
>
> --
> nadie
> "Ken" <none@none.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:49fc0656$0$2474$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk...
>>I am close to gettinga bridge camera (and no not wanting a DSLR).
>>
>> So whilst they all look similar, according to Dpreview, I like the look
>> of this because of the movable LCD screen and the current drop in prices
>> plus a Canon cashback.
>>
>> Anyone who has one? Are you happy with it before I press the BUY NOW
>> button? :-)
>>
>> Thank you if you can help.
>>
>> Ken
>

==============================================================================
TOPIC: photo organising SW
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/bef72d4e7bd83942?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 2:51 am
From: Chris H

In message <49fd3154$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Bob Larter
<bobbylarter@gmail.com> writes
>Chris H wrote:
>> In message <49fc3263$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Bob Larter
>> <bobbylarter@gmail.com> writes
>>> Chris H wrote:
>>>> In message <gtekqs$avr$1@qmul>, whisky-dave <whisky-
>>>> dave@final.front.ear> writes
>>>>>> I am looking for something that will not move all the
>>>>>> pictures out of the directories they are in.
>>>>> They are in Folders on a Mac not directories ! ;-)
>>>> Sorry I am used to UNIX :-)
>>> Folders & directories are the same thing.
>> I know... also a Mac *IS* UINX :-)
>
>Well, these days it is. ;^)
>

Actually with everything getting more visual on a PC most of the kids
call them "folders" on a PC now.

As you say folders and directories are one and the same. Hence my remark
that I was used to UNIX (which is what OSX is under the covers.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 2:54 am
From: Chris H

In message <XLaLl.23228$OO7.15613@text.news.virginmedia.com>, David J
Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.not-this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid>
writes
>Chris H wrote:
>[]
>> I know... also a Mac *IS* UINX :-)
>I thought that a Mac could run more than just UNIX?
>David

Due to Apple tightly controlling the hardware and software AFAIK since
OSX Macs have only run their version of BSD UNIX (via NEXT-Step)

The older MAC operating systems were their own and AFAIK no UNIX

Now it is an Intel chip I think people have ported OSX to PC's and I am
sure some one has managed to get Windows on a Mac...

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 3:25 am
From: nospam

In article <XLaLl.23228$OO7.15613@text.news.virginmedia.com>, David J
Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.not-this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid>
wrote:

> I thought that a Mac could run more than just UNIX?

os x is built on unix but macs can run other operating systems
including linux and windows.

== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 3:25 am
From: nospam

In article <1UoLTPBKnW$JFAQN@phaedsys.demon.co.uk>, Chris H
<chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:

> Due to Apple tightly controlling the hardware and software AFAIK since
> OSX Macs have only run their version of BSD UNIX (via NEXT-Step)

nonsense.

> The older MAC operating systems were their own and AFAIK no UNIX

the older mac os was not unix, but that didn't prevent running other
operating systems on mac hardware. apple even shipped a version of
linux for a while.

> Now it is an Intel chip I think people have ported OSX to PC's and I am
> sure some one has managed to get Windows on a Mac...

os x comes with the ability to dual boot windows, out of the box.
prior to intel macs, the os x kernel (which is open source) ran on
intel pcs.

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 3:37 am
From: "David J Taylor"

nospam wrote:
> In article <XLaLl.23228$OO7.15613@text.news.virginmedia.com>, David J
> Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.not-this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> I thought that a Mac could run more than just UNIX?
>
> os x is built on unix but macs can run other operating systems
> including linux and windows.

That's what I thought, in contrast to what had been written.

Thanks,
David

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 3:37 am
From: Chris H

In message <030520090325581972%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> writes
>In article <1UoLTPBKnW$JFAQN@phaedsys.demon.co.uk>, Chris H
><chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:
>
>> Due to Apple tightly controlling the hardware and software AFAIK since
>> OSX Macs have only run their version of BSD UNIX (via NEXT-Step)
>
>nonsense.

Care to elaborate as according to all the people I know that is the
case. The people I know being Apple. See the OFFICIAL
www.developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

where Apple state that OSX is built on Mach 3.0 and FreeBSD 5

Also see the Wiki peadia entry for OSX where is states that Next-Step
was based on Mach 3 and BSD.... when Steve Jobs moved back to Apple they
too developed an OS on Mach-3 and BSD just like Next-Step....

Who which bit is nonsense and where is your evidence.

>> The older MAC operating systems were their own and AFAIK no UNIX
>
>the older mac os was not unix,

I said that.

> but that didn't prevent running other
>operating systems on mac hardware.
> apple even shipped a version of
>linux for a while.

SO apart from the Apple supplied OS's (and Linux for a while what OS did
the Mac's run?

>> Now it is an Intel chip I think people have ported OSX to PC's and I am
>> sure some one has managed to get Windows on a Mac...
>
>os x comes with the ability to dual boot windows, out of the box.
>prior to intel macs, the os x kernel (which is open source) ran on
>intel pcs.

Fair enough

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 3:38 am
From: Chris H

In message <030520090325561853%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> writes
>In article <XLaLl.23228$OO7.15613@text.news.virginmedia.com>, David J
>Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.not-this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>> I thought that a Mac could run more than just UNIX?
>
>os x is built on unix but macs can run other operating systems
>including linux and windows.

Apart from Linux and Windows (though why anyone would want to run a pale
copy of UNIX or windows on a Mac escapes me) what other RTOS run on
Macs?

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 4:17 am
From: nospam

In article <4l8YfaDZPX$JFACK@phaedsys.demon.co.uk>, Chris H
<chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:

> Who which bit is nonsense and where is your evidence.

the bit that's nonsense is:
> >> OSX Macs have only run their version of BSD UNIX (via NEXT-Step)

they have run other versions. see below.

> >the older mac os was not unix,
>
> I said that.
>
> > but that didn't prevent running other
> >operating systems on mac hardware.
> > apple even shipped a version of
> >linux for a while.
>
> SO apart from the Apple supplied OS's (and Linux for a while what OS did
> the Mac's run?

netbsd, freebsd, apple's a/ux, linux (several versions in addition to
apple's), windows (intel macs only). supposedly there was a way to run
the powerpc version of windows nt on a powermac.

<http://www.netbsd.org/ports/mac68k/>
<http://www.macbsd.com/macbsd/index.html>
<http://www.freebsd.org/platforms/ppc.html>
<http://www.openbsd.org/macppc.html>
<http://www.ppcnerds.org/index.html>
<http://www.debian.org/ports/powerpc/>
<http://www.mklinux.org/>
<http://refit.sourceforge.net/>
<https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MactelSupportTeam/CommunityHelpPages>

==============================================================================
TOPIC: French tradition
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/700b056ebb208d61?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 5:01 am
From: Ofnuts

Paul Furman wrote:
> MJK wrote:
>> Muguet => thrush
>> http://images-piegees.over-blog.com/article-30950318.html
>
> I never heard of a plant called thrush, just the bird.
> Any idea what the latin name is?
>

Convallaria majalis

--
Bertrand

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Reminder: send your puns by May 10th, 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a48b4b5b961ad293?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, May 3 2009 6:16 am
From: "Bowser"

Punography is due on May 10th, 2009. Shoot those visual puns while there's
still time.

http://www.pbase.com/shootin/gallery/punography

BTW, I was passing by a church last week, and spotted two nuns and a priest
on the steps. I asked them to jump off the bottom step so I could take a
picture for the mandate. They refused. Shame. No sense of humah.

"Leap of Faith"

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.photo.digital"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.photo.digital+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Sunday, May 3, 2009

rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 8 topics - digest

0 comments:

Live Traffic

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Sunday, May 3, 2009

rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 8 topics - digest

0 comments:

Search

Live Traffic