In message <sb7bpj$h40$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:11 on Sat, 26 Jun
2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at 16:03:36 on
>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>
>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>
>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people still have
>> those?
>>
>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>
>Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD sensibly?

The electronics in such cameras were so thirsty themselves (maybe half
an hour from 4x AA) that I don't think the tiny HDD [1" platter perhaps]
would make much impact.
--
Roland Perry

On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 15:13:02 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <sb7bpj$h40$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:11 on Sat, 26 Jun
>2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at 16:03:36 on
>>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>>
>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>
>>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people still have
>>> those?
>>>
>>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>>
>>Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD sensibly?
>
>The electronics in such cameras were so thirsty themselves (maybe half
>an hour from 4x AA) that I don't think the tiny HDD [1" platter perhaps]
>would make much impact.
>
You used to have external batteries (usually belt-mounted) available
which plugged in instead of the charger. Plan B was a pocketful of
rechargeables in a different pocket from any bunches of keys.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sb7bpj$h40$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:11 on Sat, 26 Jun
> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at 16:03:36 on
>>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>>
>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>
>>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people still have
>>> those?
>>>
>>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>>
>> Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD sensibly?
>
> The electronics in such cameras were so thirsty themselves (maybe half
> an hour from 4x AA) that I don't think the tiny HDD [1" platter perhaps]
> would make much impact.

Good point.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

In message <s4eedgd8rgttg2lqbb8unq4ui4qt0sp88g@4ax.com>, at 15:27:24 on
Sat, 26 Jun 2021, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
remarked:
>On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 15:13:02 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <sb7bpj$h40$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:11 on Sat, 26 Jun
>>2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at 16:03:36 on
>>>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>>
>>>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people still have
>>>> those?
>>>>
>>>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>>>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>>>
>>>Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD sensibly?
>>
>>The electronics in such cameras were so thirsty themselves (maybe half
>>an hour from 4x AA) that I don't think the tiny HDD [1" platter perhaps]
>>would make much impact.
>>
>You used to have external batteries (usually belt-mounted) available
>which plugged in instead of the charger. Plan B was a pocketful of
>rechargeables in a different pocket from any bunches of keys.

Yes, that was possible. So HDD PCMCIA cards even more of a go-er.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <s4eedgd8rgttg2lqbb8unq4ui4qt0sp88g@4ax.com>, at 15:27:24 on
> Sat, 26 Jun 2021, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
> remarked:
>> On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 15:13:02 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <sb7bpj$h40$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:11 on Sat, 26 Jun
>>> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at 16:03:36 on
>>>>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>>>
>>>>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people still have
>>>>> those?
>>>>>
>>>>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>>>>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>>>>
>>>> Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD sensibly?
>>>
>>> The electronics in such cameras were so thirsty themselves (maybe half
>>> an hour from 4x AA) that I don't think the tiny HDD [1" platter perhaps]
>>> would make much impact.
>>>
>> You used to have external batteries (usually belt-mounted) available
>> which plugged in instead of the charger. Plan B was a pocketful of
>> rechargeables in a different pocket from any bunches of keys.
>
> Yes, that was possible. So HDD PCMCIA cards even more of a go-er.

I think it was large DSLRs that used them, so they probably had a pretty
large battery, and often a second battery in an external grip. So, yes,
such disk-cards would be viable.

On 26/06/2021 14:58, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at 16:03:36 on
>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>
>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>
>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people still have
>> those?
>>
>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>
> Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD sensibly?
>

The Sony Mavica had a floppy drive! Somehow I don't think it offered raw.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In message <sb7tso$ard$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:07:04 on Sat, 26 Jun
2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 26/06/2021 14:58, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at 16:03:36 on
>>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>>
>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>
>>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people still have
>>> those?
>>>
>>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>> Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD
>>sensibly?
>
>The Sony Mavica had a floppy drive! Somehow I don't think it offered raw.

Camcorders are of course an earlier digital photography medium than
still cameras, and used a variety of 'drives' as storage. The first I
owned (from about 1986) used a mini-VHS tape; same tape but smaller
cartridge case.

A still from a 1988 movie, digitised copy of a copy, no raw video there:

http://www.perry.co.uk/images/observation-car.jpg

Later ones used small-format DVDs or newer forms of tape.

Perhaps the first original digital *stills* I have are from such a
handheld camcorder (introduced Q3/2000, Sony DCR-PC110E, Mini-DV tape)
which also had a photo-mode:

http://www.perry.co.uk/images/fuji-building.jpg

Oh, we wanted trains? Only a done-today frame capture I'm afraid (video
from May 2001), a little further along the tracks just visible above:

http://www.perry.co.uk/images/daiba.jpg

As we can see, the stills resolution was inherently much higher than the
video.

[All of these devices were relatively bulky and with low battery life].

--
Roland Perry

On 27/06/2021 08:39, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <sb7tso$ard$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:07:04 on Sat, 26 Jun
> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>> On 26/06/2021 14:58, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at 16:03:36 on
>>>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>>
>>>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people still have
>>>> those?
>>>>
>>>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>>>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>>>  Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD sensibly?
>>
>> The Sony Mavica had a floppy drive! Somehow I don't think it offered raw.
>
> Camcorders are of course an earlier digital photography medium than
> still cameras, and used a variety of 'drives' as storage. The first I
> owned (from about 1986) used a mini-VHS tape; same tape but smaller
> cartridge case.

In the early 80s, Hitachi (I think) brought out a monochrome video
camera that recorded on a conventional audio cassette, though that was
analogue (as, of course, was VHS/Betamax). That never went on sale in
this country, I came across one someone had brought back from a trade
fair in Tokyo. The first practical digital video cameras were the Sony
Digibeta and JVC equivalents from around 1993.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In message <sb9bft$3a9$3@dont-email.me>, at 09:05:17 on Sun, 27 Jun
2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 27/06/2021 08:39, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <sb7tso$ard$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:07:04 on Sat, 26 Jun
>>2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 26/06/2021 14:58, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at 16:03:36 on
>>>>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>>>
>>>>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people still have
>>>>> those?
>>>>>
>>>>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>>>>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>>>>  Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD sensibly?
>>>
>>> The Sony Mavica had a floppy drive! Somehow I don't think it offered raw.

>> Camcorders are of course an earlier digital photography medium than
>>still cameras, and used a variety of 'drives' as storage. The first I
>>owned (from about 1986) used a mini-VHS tape; same tape but smaller
>>cartridge case.
>
>In the early 80s, Hitachi (I think) brought out a monochrome video
>camera that recorded on a conventional audio cassette, though that was
>analogue (as, of course, was VHS/Betamax).

A friend had a Sony Betamax colour camcorder in 1982/3, and I have just
one tape from it (but nothing to play it on).

>That never went on sale in this country, I came across one someone had
>brought back from a trade fair in Tokyo. The first practical digital
>video cameras were the Sony Digibeta and JVC equivalents from around
>1993.

You could be right defining a VHS-tape camcorder as partly analogue,
although I was thinking more of the digital sensor. Or do we consider
a CCD to be 'analogue' too?

I never had a DVD-R camcorder, I wonder if they could be considered
'fully digital'?

Looking again at the DCR-PC110 from 2000, it's 1.07 million pixels

Still image sizes 1152 x 864[1], 640 x 480
Still storage medium Memory Stick

Movie clips (saved to MS) 320 x 240 - max 15 seconds
160 x 112 - max 60 seconds[2]

Which might explain why I've got so few images/movies stored, the
longest 24 seconds!

[1] Typically 550kbytes
[2] Typically 3.8MB/second, so that's a 256MB card.
--
Roland Perry

On 27/06/2021 10:26, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <sb9bft$3a9$3@dont-email.me>, at 09:05:17 on Sun, 27 Jun
> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>> On 27/06/2021 08:39, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <sb7tso$ard$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:07:04 on Sat, 26 Jun
>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 26/06/2021 14:58, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>> 16:03:36 on
>>>>>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people still
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> those?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>>>>>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>>>>>  Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD sensibly?
>>>>
>>>> The Sony Mavica had a floppy drive! Somehow I don't think it offered
>>>> raw.
>
>>>  Camcorders are of course an earlier digital photography medium than
>>> still cameras, and used a variety of 'drives' as storage. The first I
>>> owned (from about 1986) used a mini-VHS tape; same tape but smaller
>>> cartridge case.
>>
>> In the early 80s, Hitachi (I think) brought out a monochrome video
>> camera that recorded on a conventional audio cassette, though that was
>> analogue (as, of course, was VHS/Betamax).
>
> A friend had a Sony Betamax colour camcorder in 1982/3, and I have just
> one tape from it (but nothing to play it on).
>
>> That never went on sale in this country, I came across one someone had
>> brought back from a trade fair in Tokyo. The first practical digital
>> video cameras were the Sony Digibeta and JVC equivalents from around
>> 1993.
>
> You could be right defining a VHS-tape camcorder as partly analogue,
> although I was thinking more of the digital sensor. Or do we consider
> a CCD to be 'analogue' too?

The early betacam/max cameras were plumbicon tubes of course. Definitely
analogue. My one claim to fame is I was the first cameraman in ITV to
use a CCD camera on a drama.[1] We had to get special dispensation from
the IBA as Sony had just imported the first batch and both BBC and the
IBA engineering departments were still evaluating them to see if they
met broadcast specs.[2]

[1] A children's drama about a boy how crawls down under the sheets in
his bed and enters a weird world with a monster at the end. I had to
crwal down with him and it was a very confined space and the CCD camera
was only about half the size of the studio portables we had at the time.

[2] These day, who cares? (See GB News!)
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In message <sb9hju$kpk$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:49:50 on Sun, 27 Jun
2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 27/06/2021 10:26, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <sb9bft$3a9$3@dont-email.me>, at 09:05:17 on Sun, 27 Jun
>>2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 27/06/2021 08:39, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <sb7tso$ard$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:07:04 on Sat, 26 Jun
>>>>2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 26/06/2021 14:58, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>16:03:36 on
>>>>>>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>>>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people
>>>>>>>still have
>>>>>>> those?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot was big
>>>>>>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>>>>>>  Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD sensibly?
>>>>>
>>>>> The Sony Mavica had a floppy drive! Somehow I don't think it
>>>>>offered raw.
>>
>>>>  Camcorders are of course an earlier digital photography medium
>>>>than still cameras, and used a variety of 'drives' as storage. The
>>>>first I owned (from about 1986) used a mini-VHS tape; same tape but
>>>>smaller cartridge case.
>>>
>>> In the early 80s, Hitachi (I think) brought out a monochrome video
>>>camera that recorded on a conventional audio cassette, though that
>>>was analogue (as, of course, was VHS/Betamax).

>> A friend had a Sony Betamax colour camcorder in 1982/3, and I have
>>just one tape from it (but nothing to play it on).
>>
>>> That never went on sale in this country, I came across one someone
>>>had brought back from a trade fair in Tokyo. The first practical
>>>digital video cameras were the Sony Digibeta and JVC equivalents
>>>from around 1993.

Yes, one history site has the 1995 Sony DCR-VX1000 as perhaps the first.

>> You could be right defining a VHS-tape camcorder as partly analogue,
>>although I was thinking more of the digital sensor. Or do we consider
>> a CCD to be 'analogue' too?
>
>The early betacam/max cameras were plumbicon tubes of course.

The one I mentioned earlier turns out to have a "1/2-inch SMF Trinicon
pickup tube". 1983 date seems correct. Records on a Sony L-500 cassette

> Definitely analogue. My one claim to fame is I was the first cameraman
>in ITV to use a CCD camera on a drama.[1] We had to get special
>dispensation from the IBA as Sony had just imported the first batch and
>both BBC and the IBA engineering departments were still evaluating them
>to see if they met broadcast specs.[2]
>
>[1] A children's drama about a boy how crawls down under the sheets in
>his bed and enters a weird world with a monster at the end. I had to
>crwal down with him and it was a very confined space and the CCD camera
>was only about half the size of the studio portables we had at the time.
>
>[2] These day, who cares? (See GB News!)

--
Roland Perry

On 27/06/2021 11:04, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <sb9hju$kpk$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:49:50 on Sun, 27 Jun
> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>> On 27/06/2021 10:26, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <sb9bft$3a9$3@dont-email.me>, at 09:05:17 on Sun, 27 Jun
>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 27/06/2021 08:39, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <sb7tso$ard$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:07:04 on Sat, 26 Jun
>>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 26/06/2021 14:58, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <dkrbdg1f0ho0va465qbm8qdhjn77kvtua1@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>> 16:03:36 on
>>>>>>>> Fri, 25 Jun 2021, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam>
>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>>>>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Crikey! Uses a PCMCIA memory card. I wonder how many people
>>>>>>>> still  have
>>>>>>>> those?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (Puts up hand - I think I may have two). I wonder if the slot
>>>>>>>> was big
>>>>>>>> enough (double height) for a PCMCIA HDD.
>>>>>>>  Would a typical camera battery be big enough to drive a HDD
>>>>>>> sensibly?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Sony Mavica had a floppy drive! Somehow I don't think it
>>>>>> offered  raw.
>>>
>>>>>  Camcorders are of course an earlier digital photography medium
>>>>> than  still cameras, and used a variety of 'drives' as storage. The
>>>>> first I  owned (from about 1986) used a mini-VHS tape; same tape
>>>>> but smaller  cartridge case.
>>>>
>>>> In the early 80s, Hitachi (I think) brought out a monochrome video
>>>> camera that recorded on a conventional audio cassette, though that
>>>> was  analogue (as, of course, was VHS/Betamax).
>
>>>  A friend had a Sony Betamax colour camcorder in 1982/3, and I have
>>> just  one tape from it (but nothing to play it on).
>>>
>>>> That never went on sale in this country, I came across one someone
>>>> had  brought back from a trade fair in Tokyo. The first practical
>>>> digital  video cameras were the Sony Digibeta and JVC equivalents
>>>> from around  1993.
>
> Yes, one history site has the 1995 Sony DCR-VX1000 as perhaps the first.

Domestic

>
>>>  You could be right defining a VHS-tape camcorder as partly analogue,
>>> although I was thinking more of the digital sensor. Or do we consider
>>> a CCD to be 'analogue' too?
>>
>> The early betacam/max cameras were plumbicon tubes of course.
>
> The one I mentioned earlier turns out to have a "1/2-inch SMF Trinicon
> pickup tube". 1983 date seems correct. Records on a Sony L-500 cassette

Trinicon was the Sony brand name for the 3-colour single tube plumbicon.
See also trinitron.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>> And another: "Still images also have three JPEG compression levels
>> available: Superfine, Fine, and Normal, plus a RAW setting that records
>> the image straight from the CCD, with no further processing."
>>
>> Six pictures on a 16MB memory card.
>
> Yes, though most people used larger memory cards by then, particularly if
> shooting raw. I'll have to see if I can find some of my early cameras and
> see what size cards I was using. But they'd have been much larger than
> 16MB; even my very first memory card in the summer of 2000 was 48MB.
>
> Of course, when making the move from 35mm film, anything over 36 shots on
> one card was a bonus, so people had no expectation of holding thousands of
> raw images on one tiny, inexpensive card, as I routinely do now.
>
>

Plus at the time there was some wariness about the prospect of a corrupted
larger card losing you many photos at once; so some people preferred using
several smaller cards rather than the largest available.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> And another: "Still images also have three JPEG compression levels
>>> available: Superfine, Fine, and Normal, plus a RAW setting that records
>>> the image straight from the CCD, with no further processing."
>>>
>>> Six pictures on a 16MB memory card.
>>
>> Yes, though most people used larger memory cards by then, particularly if
>> shooting raw. I'll have to see if I can find some of my early cameras and
>> see what size cards I was using. But they'd have been much larger than
>> 16MB; even my very first memory card in the summer of 2000 was 48MB.
>>
>> Of course, when making the move from 35mm film, anything over 36 shots on
>> one card was a bonus, so people had no expectation of holding thousands of
>> raw images on one tiny, inexpensive card, as I routinely do now.
>>
>>
>
> Plus at the time there was some wariness about the prospect of a corrupted
> larger card losing you many photos at once; so some people preferred using
> several smaller cards rather than the largest available.
>

I think that remains true even now. Better to have four 64GB cards than one
256GB.

In message <sb6q3i$1ir$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:56:18 on Sat, 26 Jun
2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sb4s7l$c0o$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:21 on Fri, 25 Jun
>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, my first camera that offered the raw (not RAW!) format was a Canon
>>> PowerShot.
>>
>>> <https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/dcc471.html>
>>
>> Odd that page says (and I quote) "Still images : JPEG or RAW"
>
>Yes, that very common error was what I was pointing out when I made the
>comment that triggered this subthread. JPEG and TIFF are correctly
>capitalised, but it's wrong to capitalise raw, as it's a simple English
>description of the image file's contents, not an acronym. But lots of
>people still make that error, as they assume that all image file types
>should be capitalised.

There's two issues here. One's believing what a camera manufacturer says
about its own products, the other is capitalising filetypes.

I noticed that some image processing software I was using yesterday
defaulted to using .JPG as the extension for output files. Which is
unhelpful for case-sensitive urls, if nothing else.

>> .crw filetype apparently. (derived from Canon RAW)
>>
>> "A raw dump of CCD pixels with no compression" according to some
>> informed sources.
>
>Yes, that's partly correct, though most raw files are compressed, not
>always losslessly.
>
>> And another: "Still images also have three JPEG compression levels
>> available: Superfine, Fine, and Normal, plus a RAW setting that records
>> the image straight from the CCD, with no further processing."
>>
>> Six pictures on a 16MB memory card.
>
>Yes, though most people used larger memory cards by then, particularly if
>shooting raw. I'll have to see if I can find some of my early cameras and
>see what size cards I was using. But they'd have been much larger than
>16MB; even my very first memory card in the summer of 2000 was 48MB.

The 2001 digital camera I've discussed in another subthread probably
came with a 256MB card, but 64MB could easily have cost as much as a
pocket-camera itself.

My very first aftermarket memory card was 2MB, but by 2003 I was up to
1GB.

The challenge in those days was how to cache photos when on a trip. With
35mm film you could simply hang onto the unexposed rolls. By the time it
was digital, you needed a laptop or similar to scrape and erase the
card(s) for reuse. But in 2001 my laptop only had 4GB I think. It's a
tedious arms race!

That laptop did have a webcam though, and as far as I can tell took my
first selfie (but long before the term was coined)
--
Roland Perry

In message <sbbrsg$q6a$1@dont-email.me>, at 06:57:20 on Mon, 28 Jun
2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And another: "Still images also have three JPEG compression levels
>>>> available: Superfine, Fine, and Normal, plus a RAW setting that records
>>>> the image straight from the CCD, with no further processing."
>>>>
>>>> Six pictures on a 16MB memory card.
>>>
>>> Yes, though most people used larger memory cards by then, particularly if
>>> shooting raw. I'll have to see if I can find some of my early cameras and
>>> see what size cards I was using. But they'd have been much larger than
>>> 16MB; even my very first memory card in the summer of 2000 was 48MB.
>>>
>>> Of course, when making the move from 35mm film, anything over 36 shots on
>>> one card was a bonus, so people had no expectation of holding thousands of
>>> raw images on one tiny, inexpensive card, as I routinely do now.
>>
>> Plus at the time there was some wariness about the prospect of a corrupted
>> larger card losing you many photos at once; so some people preferred using
>> several smaller cards rather than the largest available.
>
>I think that remains true even now. Better to have four 64GB cards than one
>256GB.

I think I mentioned my 4GB compact flash was a bit precarious - it's
possible the camera only officially accepted up to 2GB. Nowadays I get
the odd glitch using a 128GB card in a dashcam which might be only
officially rated to 64GB.

People don't necessarily look at the device's max-spec before buying a
bigger card.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> One of the earliest originally digital pictures (~1998) of Sir Nigel
> Gresley on a railtour (can you guess the location?) which is interesting
> not just because of the almost-trespassing trainspotters, but the way
> the loco (let alone much of first coach) is stationary past the now-red
> signal, and so does the driver simply assume that because he passed it a
> couple of minutes earlier (almost slowed to a halt) at green, it's OK to
> set off whenever he feels like it? It would also have been one of the
> first such railtour stops that I'd have learnt about in advance online.
>
> http://www.perry.co.uk/images/sng.jpg
>

Provided the signal was not red when the front of the train passed it then
yes, that's the whole principle of railway signalling. The signal
authorises you into the section and that authority remains until your train
exits the section. Stopping there and proceeding several minutes later is
no different to stopping 1/2 mile further on and then proceeding, or indeed
a long section which takes several minutes to get through.

Verbal communication with the guard and dispatch staff will be required,
though, to confirm that the signal had been green, as it would otherwise
appear that they are effectively dispatching against a red.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sb6q3i$1ir$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:56:18 on Sat, 26 Jun
> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sb4s7l$c0o$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:21 on Fri, 25 Jun
>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> When first introduced the Canon Powershot range stood out among
>>>>> compact cameras for having the ability to save in RAW format.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, my first camera that offered the raw (not RAW!) format was a Canon
>>>> PowerShot.
>>>
>>>> <https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/dcc471.html>
>>>
>>> Odd that page says (and I quote) "Still images : JPEG or RAW"
>>
>> Yes, that very common error was what I was pointing out when I made the
>> comment that triggered this subthread. JPEG and TIFF are correctly
>> capitalised, but it's wrong to capitalise raw, as it's a simple English
>> description of the image file's contents, not an acronym. But lots of
>> people still make that error, as they assume that all image file types
>> should be capitalised.
>
> There's two issues here. One's believing what a camera manufacturer says
> about its own products, the other is capitalising filetypes.
>
> I noticed that some image processing software I was using yesterday
> defaulted to using .JPG as the extension for output files. Which is
> unhelpful for case-sensitive urls, if nothing else.
>
>>> .crw filetype apparently. (derived from Canon RAW)
>>>
>>> "A raw dump of CCD pixels with no compression" according to some
>>> informed sources.
>>
>> Yes, that's partly correct, though most raw files are compressed, not
>> always losslessly.
>>
>>> And another: "Still images also have three JPEG compression levels
>>> available: Superfine, Fine, and Normal, plus a RAW setting that records
>>> the image straight from the CCD, with no further processing."
>>>
>>> Six pictures on a 16MB memory card.
>>
>> Yes, though most people used larger memory cards by then, particularly if
>> shooting raw. I'll have to see if I can find some of my early cameras and
>> see what size cards I was using. But they'd have been much larger than
>> 16MB; even my very first memory card in the summer of 2000 was 48MB.
>
> The 2001 digital camera I've discussed in another subthread probably
> came with a 256MB card, but 64MB could easily have cost as much as a
> pocket-camera itself.
>
> My very first aftermarket memory card was 2MB, but by 2003 I was up to
> 1GB.
>
> The challenge in those days was how to cache photos when on a trip. With
> 35mm film you could simply hang onto the unexposed rolls. By the time it
> was digital, you needed a laptop or similar to scrape and erase the
> card(s) for reuse. But in 2001 my laptop only had 4GB I think. It's a
> tedious arms race!
>
> That laptop did have a webcam though, and as far as I can tell took my
> first selfie (but long before the term was coined)

Yes, I remember trips with cameras and multiple cards and laptop and
external hard drives etc. I did think at the time that some sort of
self-contained device which automatically pulled the contents of a card and
put them into a timestamped folder on a HDD, would be great.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:04 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
<anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:

>Yes, I remember trips with cameras and multiple cards and laptop and
>external hard drives etc. I did think at the time that some sort of
>self-contained device which automatically pulled the contents of a card and
>put them into a timestamped folder on a HDD, would be great.

They existed! I had a number over the years. Basically a laptop hdd in
a custom case with a number of slots for various memory cards. Hit the
backup button and copy the cards contents to the hard drive. Put the
card back in the camera, clear it and prey the back up drive survived
the trip home from Switzerland! Hyperdrive is one name I remember and
a quick google brings up:
<https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/123975932647>
I remember I had an IBM microdrive (a spinning hard drive in CF
format) for my first digital SLR in 2001. Over £400 for a 1GB drive!

Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:04 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
> <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, I remember trips with cameras and multiple cards and laptop and
>> external hard drives etc. I did think at the time that some sort of
>> self-contained device which automatically pulled the contents of a card and
>> put them into a timestamped folder on a HDD, would be great.
>
> They existed! I had a number over the years. Basically a laptop hdd in
> a custom case with a number of slots for various memory cards. Hit the
> backup button and copy the cards contents to the hard drive. Put the
> card back in the camera, clear it and prey the back up drive survived
> the trip home from Switzerland! Hyperdrive is one name I remember and
> a quick google brings up:
> <https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/123975932647>
>

If only I'd found that at the time!

Anna Noyd-Dryver

In message <sbfv23$bov$4@dont-email.me>, at 20:16:03 on Tue, 29 Jun
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>> One of the earliest originally digital pictures (~1998) of Sir Nigel
>> Gresley on a railtour (can you guess the location?) which is interesting
>> not just because of the almost-trespassing trainspotters, but the way
>> the loco (let alone much of first coach) is stationary past the now-red
>> signal, and so does the driver simply assume that because he passed it a
>> couple of minutes earlier (almost slowed to a halt) at green, it's OK to
>> set off whenever he feels like it? It would also have been one of the
>> first such railtour stops that I'd have learnt about in advance online.
>>
>> http://www.perry.co.uk/images/sng.jpg
>>
>
>Provided the signal was not red when the front of the train passed it then
>yes, that's the whole principle of railway signalling. The signal
>authorises you into the section and that authority remains until your train
>exits the section. Stopping there and proceeding several minutes later is
>no different to stopping 1/2 mile further on and then proceeding, or indeed
>a long section which takes several minutes to get through.
>
>Verbal communication with the guard and dispatch staff will be required,
>though, to confirm that the signal had been green, as it would otherwise
>appear that they are effectively dispatching against a red.

Most of the public on site, however, might suspect it *had* been
dispatched against a red, which was one of the reasons for me
circulating the photo, to inform later discussions such as this.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sbfv23$bov$4@dont-email.me>, at 20:16:03 on Tue, 29 Jun
> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> One of the earliest originally digital pictures (~1998) of Sir Nigel
>>> Gresley on a railtour (can you guess the location?) which is interesting
>>> not just because of the almost-trespassing trainspotters, but the way
>>> the loco (let alone much of first coach) is stationary past the now-red
>>> signal, and so does the driver simply assume that because he passed it a
>>> couple of minutes earlier (almost slowed to a halt) at green, it's OK to
>>> set off whenever he feels like it? It would also have been one of the
>>> first such railtour stops that I'd have learnt about in advance online.
>>>
>>> http://www.perry.co.uk/images/sng.jpg
>>>
>>
>> Provided the signal was not red when the front of the train passed it then
>> yes, that's the whole principle of railway signalling. The signal
>> authorises you into the section and that authority remains until your train
>> exits the section. Stopping there and proceeding several minutes later is
>> no different to stopping 1/2 mile further on and then proceeding, or indeed
>> a long section which takes several minutes to get through.
>>
>> Verbal communication with the guard and dispatch staff will be required,
>> though, to confirm that the signal had been green, as it would otherwise
>> appear that they are effectively dispatching against a red.
>
> Most of the public on site, however, might suspect it *had* been
> dispatched against a red, which was one of the reasons for me
> circulating the photo, to inform later discussions such as this.
>

Presumably there's a reason it stopped with the front off the platform (to
get something on the platform at the rear, perhaps, or to get the rear
clear of a certain point?).

gWr HSTs in certain locations used to regularly stop with the front of the
train beyond a colour light signal which returned to red in the meantime,
so dispatch in that situation is certainly not unknown.

I doubt that the actual public would either notice or care; anyone with
deeper knowledge of railways would likely understand immediately what was
going on; it's only those who have some-but-not-all railway knowledge who
would be perturbed by this.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

In message <sbi2bk$vp3$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:36 on Wed, 30 Jun
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sbfv23$bov$4@dont-email.me>, at 20:16:03 on Tue, 29 Jun
>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One of the earliest originally digital pictures (~1998) of Sir Nigel
>>>> Gresley on a railtour (can you guess the location?) which is interesting
>>>> not just because of the almost-trespassing trainspotters, but the way
>>>> the loco (let alone much of first coach) is stationary past the now-red
>>>> signal, and so does the driver simply assume that because he passed it a
>>>> couple of minutes earlier (almost slowed to a halt) at green, it's OK to
>>>> set off whenever he feels like it? It would also have been one of the
>>>> first such railtour stops that I'd have learnt about in advance online.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.perry.co.uk/images/sng.jpg
>>>>
>>>
>>> Provided the signal was not red when the front of the train passed it then
>>> yes, that's the whole principle of railway signalling. The signal
>>> authorises you into the section and that authority remains until your train
>>> exits the section. Stopping there and proceeding several minutes later is
>>> no different to stopping 1/2 mile further on and then proceeding, or indeed
>>> a long section which takes several minutes to get through.
>>>
>>> Verbal communication with the guard and dispatch staff will be required,
>>> though, to confirm that the signal had been green, as it would otherwise
>>> appear that they are effectively dispatching against a red.
>>
>> Most of the public on site, however, might suspect it *had* been
>> dispatched against a red, which was one of the reasons for me
>> circulating the photo, to inform later discussions such as this.
>
>Presumably there's a reason it stopped with the front off the platform (to
>get something on the platform at the rear, perhaps, or to get the rear
>clear of a certain point?).

iirc it was simply because it was a very long train and that was the
only way to fit all the passenger coaches.

Here's another rail tour squeeze:
<http://perry.co.uk/images/end-coach.jpg>

In this case, a double-headed train whose passengers all got off. But to
back it into the siding they had to first pull the whole train forward
half a coach.

>gWr HSTs in certain locations used to regularly stop with the front of the
>train beyond a colour light signal which returned to red in the meantime,
>so dispatch in that situation is certainly not unknown.
>
>I doubt that the actual public would either notice or care; anyone with
>deeper knowledge of railways would likely understand immediately what was
>going on; it's only those who have some-but-not-all railway knowledge who
>would be perturbed by this.

I suspect quite a lot of the audience that day would have noticed.
--
Roland Perry