Cool n groovie!

I think I am beginning to get a handle on digital imaging

There's RAW data, compression algorithms, and, of course, printer drivers to
consider too.

There is an interesting empirical test I can do with my PDA.

A 4Mp image displayed on PDA (320 by 240 screen size?) is lossy, very lossy.
Until I zoom in to the 100% level which will then display part of the image
in good details.

So, yep, the data are there but cramming so much data into so small a space
makes it in this case quite a lossy process.

Mind you, I claim no expertise in this area,  Interest = yes,

I've encountered digital images and digital cameras for a month owned one
for 2 weeks and am looking at a present shortlist of Fuji 304, 5k or 7k OR
Olympus 750UZ or family

There is so much good math in all of this, Mp, resolution, dpi for printers,
maybe even a bit of interference effect coupled with error enhancement ...

But hey - i am still at the awesome impressed stage with a 320 by 240 10fps
video (i think i am very easily pleased)

Bcubed

"Eddie" <Woofdog@kennel.com.au> wrote in message
news:40a7e3d6$0$16583$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.au...
>
> "bagal" <alan_plc@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:O74nc.78$Nc3.32@newsfe3-win.server.ntli.net...
> > Hi I am new here and am looking for a discussion forum to sound out some
> > preconceptions I have about digital imaging.
> >
>
> > the bagal
> >
> No your'e not casting pearls....unless they are of wisdom! ummm, thought
> that might be nice.
>
> Not sure how your maths argument stands up. To me, the more pixels to
cover
> the area, the more DETAIL one achieves. If one copmpares to film (Urrg,
NO,
> I will NOT call film 'analogue'!) then, fast negative film, especially b/w
> returns much noise and less detail then slow colour film. The answer is of
> course the number of silver halide crytals and their responsive nature.
> Colour slide film of good quality is slow, but within the same frame-size,
> carries far more detail, to the degree that via a projector you can
enlarge
> to huge size and maintian a sharp image.
>
> Low resolution digitail pics will pixalate badly when enlarged. If both a
3
> megapix and 5 megapix cam have the same size ccd area, then surely the 5
> megapix will carry more detail and permit larger blowups MAINTIAINING
> detail, not just STRETCHING the image.
>
> But, maybe as you say, at 6x4 who would see the difference?
>
> Just some thoughts.
>
> Eddie
>
>