rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en
rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Anything for the Perfect Shot - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/060da06a542937ca?hl=en
* simple question...maybe - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/25aaf8517adc4c7e?hl=en
* Boycott Panasonic cameras - forced proprietary battery use in firmware - 1
messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/79623194af1b296b?hl=en
* Kodak kills Kodachrome film after 74 years - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ffab234a019b33ac?hl=en
* Future of the megapixel race - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c78a5377356e2e48?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Anything for the Perfect Shot
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/060da06a542937ca?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 11:23 pm
From: "David J Taylor"
John A. wrote:
[]
> I wish I'd downloaded the beta when it was available. I didn't think
> to do so until a couple weeks after they closed the tap.
>
> I hear there's no "classic" mode. :P
Windows-7 release candidate is available for anyone to download, I
understand.
David
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 11:30 pm
From: Bob Larter
Bill Graham wrote:
>
> "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4a446d53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> Savageduck wrote:
>>> On 2009-06-25 21:43:57 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net> said:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:2009062520543516807-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>>>> ...but then live with the consequences of that, and don't complain
>>>>> even after you have been presented with solutions.
>>>>> It is appears you live to complain, and having whatever you use
>>>>> functioning optimally is not something you would put any effort
>>>>> into, as you would not be able to complain about it.
>>>>
>>>> You've got to be kidding......I have spent many hundreds of hours
>>>> reconfiguring my machine to get it to function the way I want it to.
>>>> It still doesn't, "function optimally" because of dozens of pop-ups
>>>> that slow it down, and annoy me, usually at start-up. I spend many
>>>> unhappy hours removing extraneous software from it in order to get
>>>> rid of these, but many still keep coming back, inexplicably, even
>>>> though I go through the "proper" procedure to get rid of them. As a
>>>> matter of fact, I have come to the conclusion that what this thing
>>>> really is, is another TV set, whose basic purpose in life is to
>>>> deliver ads to me under the guise of being some kind of useful tool
>>>> and/or information source. To me, its still up in the air weather or
>>>> not it is worth all the trouble it gives me. To be sure, it does do,
>>>> or is at least capable of doing some miraculous things, but at the
>>>> same time, it generates so many problems that most of the time I
>>>> find that I am behind schedule trying to keep up with it. I have
>>>> several friends who tell me they are glad they don't own one of
>>>> these beasts, and I find it very hard to argue with them. They
>>>> certainly get to spend a lot more time with their grandchildren than
>>>> I do with mine.
>>>
>>> Well that's Vista for ya!
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>>> Time to sell that machine, put your feet up, and find a good book to
>>> read.
>>
>> Personally, I'd upgrade it to XP.
>>
> No. I'm a glutton for punishment. I know I am going to, "upgrade" to
> Windows 7.
Mate, if you're having this much trouble with Vista, W7 is probably
going to be a nightmare for you.
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
==============================================================================
TOPIC: simple question...maybe
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/25aaf8517adc4c7e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 11:40 pm
From: Bob Larter
Tzorzakakis Dimitrios wrote:
> ? "John Turco" <jtur@concentric.net> ?????? ??? ??????
> news:4A445D21.1C9A54C0@concentric.net...
>> Nicko wrote:
>>> At what resolution do you save photos that you show people on the web?
>>> Not photos to be used for specific purposes in web pages, but photos to
>>> be posted just to show to people, say, in a personal gallery.
>>>
>>> Or, I guess more specifically, what is the most common resolution that
>>> people (not necessarily photographers, just average people) have their
>>> monitors set at?
>>>
>>> I'm having a hard time deciding what I should use as a default. I have
>>> been using 96ppi, because that's a compromise between 72ppi (way too
>>> coarse) and 120ppi(files too big?), which is the native resolution of my
>>> 19" monitor, but will the larger dimensions of photos annoy people who
>>> are still running monitors at 72ppi on smaller screens? I don't think
>>> that bandwidth is of much of a concern, but correct me if I am wrong
>>> (how many people are actually still using dialup service?).
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>
>> Hello, Nicko:
>>
>> I'm a dial-up slug, and my Sceptre 24" LCD monitor (model X24WG) is
>> always running at its native resolution of 1920x1200 pixels.
>>
>>
> Hi,
> I have a 2mbps DSL, my 20" Samsung is @1680X1050 which is its native
> resolution. (Widescreen 16:10 or whatever).{Syncmaster 206BW}.
Dual 1600x1200 screens here. (One LCD, one CRT)
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Boycott Panasonic cameras - forced proprietary battery use in firmware
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/79623194af1b296b?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 11:48 pm
From: "David J Taylor"
Chris Malcolm wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote:
[]
>> Well, the Etrex HCx models will go about 25 hours and hot start in 3
>> seconds.
>
> The HCx models use the latest low power chip set and are what I was
> referring to. But note that Garmin's cited battery life assume a
> specific kind of average use. The units have various modes of use,
> some of which require more power, some less. But that's about 50% more
> life than the earlier Sirf powered Etrexen, which in turn IIRC were
> around double the life of the first models.
Thanks for that, Chris. Taking rough figures, 25 hour life for 2 x AA
cells suggests a current drain of around 100mA when active. Relating this
to the typical Li-ion battery (3.7V) would suggest a current drain of
around 65mA. I wonder how much that would affect battery life on a
typical DSLR or on a typical P&S camera?
David
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Kodak kills Kodachrome film after 74 years
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ffab234a019b33ac?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 11:51 pm
From: Bob Larter
Twibil wrote:
> On Jun 24, 5:45 pm, Ron Hunter <rphun...@charter.net> wrote:
>> 74 years is a pretty darn good run for ANY technology, don't you think?
>
> In an unrelated story, a bone flute was found not too long ago in a
> stone-aged German cave. It works just exactly like a modern flute
> except that it plays fewer notes.
>
> It carbon dates to plus or minus 35,000 years.
What, it might come from as much as 35,000 years in the future?
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Future of the megapixel race
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/c78a5377356e2e48?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 26 2009 11:56 pm
From: Bob Larter
bugbear wrote:
> Robert Sneddon wrote:
>> In message <nsg445hsf9nnitng6a59r8mgv9dauav740@4ax.com>, John Navas
>> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes
>> [Clip]
>>> images from current high megapixel sensors in both
>>> compact digital cameras (e.g., Panasonic DMC-FZ28) and dSLR cameras are
>>> unquestionably better than images from earlier comparable sensors with
>>> lower megapixel counts (e.g., Panasonic DMC-FZ8).
>>
>> It's a truism that newer components tend be better than older
>> components; if they were worse then there would be no point in designing
>> and building new ones.
>
> You haven't seen guitar players clawing over each other
> to get vintage tone capacitors!
Don't get me started on audiophools...
<http://grumpyoldarts.com/2009/04/18/audiophools/>
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 27 2009 12:10 am
From: nospam
In article <4a45c2a7$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Bob Larter
<bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don't get me started on audiophools...
> <http://grumpyoldarts.com/2009/04/18/audiophools/>
they're a hoot. how about a 770 pound turntable that uses bullet-proof
wood, for only $150k:
<http://www.needledoctor.com/Clearaudio-Statement-Turntable>
and don't cheap out on the needle:
<http://www.needledoctor.com/Clearaudio-Goldfinger-Phono-Cartridge>
==============================================================================
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
0 comments:
Post a Comment