Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Nothing ever becomes real until it is experienced. -- John Keats


computers / comp.os.linux.misc / Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

SubjectAuthor
* SD cards and camera ("scanner")Eli the Bearded
+* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")John-Paul Stewart
|`* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Eli the Bearded
| +- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")David W. Hodgins
| +- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Stéphane CARPENTIER
| `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")John-Paul Stewart
|  `- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Dan Espen
+* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")David W. Hodgins
|`- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Eli the Bearded
+- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Bit Twister
+* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")marrgol
|`* SOLVED Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Eli the Bearded
| `* Re: SOLVED Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
|  `* Re: SOLVED Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Eli the Bearded
|   +- Re: SOLVED Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
|   `- Re: SOLVED Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Computer Nerd Kev
+- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Lew Pitcher
`* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Carlos E.R.
 `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Eli the Bearded
  `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Carlos E.R.
   +- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
   `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
    +* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
    |+- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Andreas Kohlbach
    |`* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
    | `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
    |  +* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Charlie Gibbs
    |  |+* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
    |  ||`* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Carlos E.R.
    |  || `- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
    |  |`* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
    |  | `- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Charlie Gibbs
    |  `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
    |   `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
    |    `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Charlie Gibbs
    |     `- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
    `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Carlos E.R.
     +* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
     |`* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Carlos E.R.
     | `- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
     `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Eli the Bearded
      +* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
      |`* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
      | `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Charlie Gibbs
      |  `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
      |   `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
      |    +* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Charlie Gibbs
      |    |`* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
      |    | `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
      |    |  `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
      |    |   `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
      |    |    +* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
      |    |    |+- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
      |    |    |`- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Charlie Gibbs
      |    |    `- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")Eli the Bearded
      |    `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
      |     `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
      |      `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
      |       `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
      |        `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
      |         `* Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")The Natural Philosopher
      |          `- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945
      `- Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")25.BX945

Pages:123
Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7326&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7326

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 09:47:39 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me>
<oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 08:47:39 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e6cb3f7a6b45827f84da0a010cfa5462";
logging-data="20412"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18fiFQm5SOCcZHBDkMU5ZkPoinO6eBwHkM="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:OJHLFdHZrULew7aT/gOoOf8Q/nc=
In-Reply-To: <oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Thu, 12 May 2022 08:47 UTC

On 12/05/2022 05:36, 25.BX945 wrote:
> On 5/11/22 11:11 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 11/05/2022 15:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>> Let's just say that the first digital cameras - often
>>>    VGA rez, sometimes a bit worse, where STILL better than
>>>    Disk Film
>>
>> Indeed they were.
>>
>> My 35mm fuji film was around 3MPx but the grains didn't have square
>> edges...todays CCDs match or exceed half plate cameras let alone
>> medium format.
>
>   I still have a few medium-format cameras - Pentax 6x7,
>   Mamiya 645 Super .... also some 4x5 Graflex press cameras
>   and some big 4x5 studio camera and the body (but no good
>   lenses) for an 8x10 studio. Got a few pix from that one
>   using a borrowed lens - spectacular.
>
>   The fold-up "press cameras" are far more practical.
>
>   Somehow, despite modern sensor rez, the medium-format
>   film cameras still make for a "better" picture. It may
>   be like the tube-vs-transistor amplifier thing, tek-spex
>   ain't the whole of it. Tri-X with dilute HC110 in
>   medium and large format makes absolutely splendid pix.
>   Plus-X was good too, but you can't get it anymore. Hate
>   the T-grain films. I like the "tone" of Tri/Plus-X.
>   Same with the double-emulsion expanded-range Verichrome
>   Pan. I did get some fair results from B&W chromogenics
>   however.

I think that fuzzy grain of emulsion that cover several pixels is less
obvious than the square edged pixels.

Probably what needs to be done is analogous to the CD techniques of
introducing jitter to the output so that there is no 'strobing' effect
at subharmonics of the sampling frequency

Early D to A converters could indeed suffer from 'crossover' distortion
until the oversampling and pulse width modulations types took over.

Todays CDS and players are infinitely better than vinyl, but I am happy
to sell off all my old vinyl at three times the price of getting a CD
replacement of the same album.

--
Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper
name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating
or condoning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its
logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of
the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead. They must
face it, then decide whether this is what they want or not.

Ayn Rand.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7327&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7327

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: robin_li...@es.invalid (Carlos E.R.)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 13:17:05 +0200
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net AzRJVtMxdQet+bHofU5i3gepbqUwPo/qwSO02oXoJau3TqAuwI
X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wTjfO/zLYafjQ2X57rvSVCjlcJM=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.0
Content-Language: en-CA
In-Reply-To: <8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 by: Carlos E.R. - Thu, 12 May 2022 11:17 UTC

On 2022-05-11 16:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
> On 5/10/22 6:09 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

....

>   If you think 110 was horrible (and it was), towards
>   the end there was Kodak Disk Film - basically specks
>   of 8mm movie film stuck to a circular pinwheel card.

I heard of it. I wonder what advantage they thought it could have.

>   Movie film is bad to begin with - any smoothness comes
>   from the brain blending all those frames together.
>
>   Let's just say that the first digital cameras - often
>   VGA rez, sometimes a bit worse, where STILL better than
>   Disk Film  :-)
>
>
>
>

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<1HefK.881$5gkf.773@fx37.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7328&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7328

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx37.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
From: cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me>
<oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <1HefK.881$5gkf.773@fx37.iad>
X-Complaints-To: https://www.astraweb.com/aup
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 21:08:13 UTC
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 21:08:13 GMT
X-Received-Bytes: 1509
 by: Charlie Gibbs - Thu, 12 May 2022 21:08 UTC

On 2022-05-12, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Todays CDS and players are infinitely better than vinyl, but I am happy
> to sell off all my old vinyl at three times the price of getting a CD
> replacement of the same album.

Assuming it was ever re-released on CD... :-(

In my copious spare time (ha!) I'll have to see about digitizing
those oldies but goodies. I'm already looking into digitizing
old videos, although that project is currently also on the back
burner. (Things are getting pretty crowded back there...)

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<to-dnd1K1JiVXuD_nZ2dnUU7-RPNnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7329&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7329

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 21:31:35 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me>
<oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 22:31:34 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <to-dnd1K1JiVXuD_nZ2dnUU7-RPNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 68
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-tyWKJIzvk99g6/N34WbGYwcIUJa1iQYFm9GnkBgrigiTKWGT5Pff9NT+Lp36oFIpsxakE40iD5OCMG3!7rKtKg0j6/ce6jaHwqAuWPceysJMH4J65O19OlMuDqwi8DHcqBy4UwDQc3lVfbCy4ZNqQxu3UGtW!snKrTzpS6U69ztAkENc=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4592
 by: 25.BX945 - Fri, 13 May 2022 02:31 UTC

On 5/12/22 4:47 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 12/05/2022 05:36, 25.BX945 wrote:
>> On 5/11/22 11:11 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 11/05/2022 15:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>>> Let's just say that the first digital cameras - often
>>>>    VGA rez, sometimes a bit worse, where STILL better than
>>>>    Disk Film
>>>
>>> Indeed they were.
>>>
>>> My 35mm fuji film was around 3MPx but the grains didn't have square
>>> edges...todays CCDs match or exceed half plate cameras let alone
>>> medium format.
>>
>>    I still have a few medium-format cameras - Pentax 6x7,
>>    Mamiya 645 Super .... also some 4x5 Graflex press cameras
>>    and some big 4x5 studio camera and the body (but no good
>>    lenses) for an 8x10 studio. Got a few pix from that one
>>    using a borrowed lens - spectacular.
>>
>>    The fold-up "press cameras" are far more practical.
>>
>>    Somehow, despite modern sensor rez, the medium-format
>>    film cameras still make for a "better" picture. It may
>>    be like the tube-vs-transistor amplifier thing, tek-spex
>>    ain't the whole of it. Tri-X with dilute HC110 in
>>    medium and large format makes absolutely splendid pix.
>>    Plus-X was good too, but you can't get it anymore. Hate
>>    the T-grain films. I like the "tone" of Tri/Plus-X.
>>    Same with the double-emulsion expanded-range Verichrome
>>    Pan. I did get some fair results from B&W chromogenics
>>    however.
>
> I think that  fuzzy grain of emulsion that cover several pixels is less
> obvious than the square edged pixels.
>
> Probably what needs to be done is analogous to the CD techniques of
> introducing jitter to the output so that there is no 'strobing' effect
> at subharmonics of the sampling frequency
>
> Early D to A converters could indeed suffer from 'crossover' distortion
>  until the oversampling and pulse width modulations types took over.
>
> Todays CDS and players are infinitely better than vinyl, but I am happy
> to sell off all my old vinyl at three times the price of getting a CD
> replacement of the same album.

A pity they never bothered with "Super-CD", using recordable
DVD discs ..... a little more A/D range, a little higher
sample rate. Most would never hear the diff however (and at
my age I couldn't either now) ergo sCD would have been mostly
a niche market for the 'snobs'.

There is a little optical "fuzzing" effect with film that you
don't really get with sensors of the same theoretical rez.
It's how the input is interpreted by the human eye that
really determines quality/aesthetic, not the tek-spex. This
is also why so many claim vinyl, matched with tube amps,
is "better". Technically it's LESS exact, but how humans
HEAR it .....

As for cameras, films never had a "flat" spectral response.
Sensors do, or are adjusted to. The un-flatness may be part
of the aesthetic appeal. The human eye does not have a "flat"
response either - neither in terms of spectrum or intensity.

Anyway, I still love the look and feel of medium/large-format
chemical photos.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<hImdnTAH2e6cW-D_nZ2dnUU7-UnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7330&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7330

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 21:44:17 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me>
<oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
<1HefK.881$5gkf.773@fx37.iad>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 22:44:12 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1HefK.881$5gkf.773@fx37.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <hImdnTAH2e6cW-D_nZ2dnUU7-UnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 32
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-0Ao9RETmRfhe7/Ehh0qxD+oZ0i77fdKQkSQFpQTvXdAPjoTb+VDmvwcGb9s59h7PjMFV6XO+EQznjKZ!J1Zi+YBYmSMIFuMOKfMyLox+y2XfST/Ljximaf4yhLSTvK3xxtmlS5XkM5YUHK7r/uIUKVFBixfC!SSSHUjsu+hq8yslL9qQ=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2896
 by: 25.BX945 - Fri, 13 May 2022 02:44 UTC

On 5/12/22 5:08 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-05-12, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Todays CDS and players are infinitely better than vinyl, but I am happy
>> to sell off all my old vinyl at three times the price of getting a CD
>> replacement of the same album.
>
> Assuming it was ever re-released on CD... :-(
>
> In my copious spare time (ha!) I'll have to see about digitizing
> those oldies but goodies. I'm already looking into digitizing
> old videos, although that project is currently also on the back
> burner. (Things are getting pretty crowded back there...)

The hardware/software is more than up to it these days,
affordably. Go up to 16-bit A/D resolution if you want,
double the CD sampling rate.

The "Hi-Fi", stereo or not, that appeared in the late 40s
could record sounds with considerable fidelity. This can
make for great digitizations.

Now 78rpm records - always a bit tinny plus the Bakelite
discs created more surface noise that's hard to filter out.
But, if you DO have some rare 78s then DO digitize them to
the best of your ability. Publish un-corrected raw files
so those now and future CAN clean 'em up to the max. There
has been so much pre-ww2 music lost forever already ....

There may be some "AI" methods that can be used to ascertain
what is disc-surface noise and what's the music and do things
ordinary filtering cannot.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<gridnb9Exc5FTeD_nZ2dnUU7-bOdnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7331&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7331

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 22:30:32 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 23:30:32 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <gridnb9Exc5FTeD_nZ2dnUU7-bOdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 27
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-LpTotNvaSXhwpRY8gdVHbcvxSrTivjv8WWxpE3Dp0Y08Edi5K0xLNffjWtOKZXebrfjhqcH1UM8S/qW!YhIB8kgMPFlZqhJoiSDP5rxQYAcbmvdjWSsb+pKC5Ym2buFaiQlJBSkNAWzSiSU3xqT7cTHTp4rd!NzdcecdaX10f6tEYDDc=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2077
 by: 25.BX945 - Fri, 13 May 2022 03:30 UTC

On 5/12/22 7:17 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2022-05-11 16:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>> On 5/10/22 6:09 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>    If you think 110 was horrible (and it was), towards
>>    the end there was Kodak Disk Film - basically specks
>>    of 8mm movie film stuck to a circular pinwheel card.
>
> I heard of it. I wonder what advantage they thought it could have.

The camera could be really FLAT - even flatter than a 110.

>>    Movie film is bad to begin with - any smoothness comes
>>    from the brain blending all those frames together.
>>
>>    Let's just say that the first digital cameras - often
>>    VGA rez, sometimes a bit worse, where STILL better than
>>    Disk Film  :-)

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<5mi1li-057.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7332&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7332

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: robin_li...@es.invalid (Carlos E.R.)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 10:49:41 +0200
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <5mi1li-057.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<gridnb9Exc5FTeD_nZ2dnUU7-bOdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net Bbu8QEjUtDv+WumH5UZICQ/PXf3cGQoyDdLRTnrNXwsfpI/a3m
X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dR3QNI31P0m5/926E6QKj4BkR6w=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.0
Content-Language: en-CA
In-Reply-To: <gridnb9Exc5FTeD_nZ2dnUU7-bOdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 by: Carlos E.R. - Fri, 13 May 2022 08:49 UTC

On 2022-05-13 05:30, 25.BX945 wrote:
> On 5/12/22 7:17 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2022-05-11 16:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>> On 5/10/22 6:09 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>    If you think 110 was horrible (and it was), towards
>>>    the end there was Kodak Disk Film - basically specks
>>>    of 8mm movie film stuck to a circular pinwheel card.
>>
>> I heard of it. I wonder what advantage they thought it could have.
>
>
> The camera could be really FLAT - even flatter than a 110.

I think there were cameras using 8 mm movie film. Tiny.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<4ri1li-057.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7333&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7333

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: robin_li...@es.invalid (Carlos E.R.)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 10:52:20 +0200
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <4ri1li-057.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me>
<oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
<1HefK.881$5gkf.773@fx37.iad>
<hImdnTAH2e6cW-D_nZ2dnUU7-UnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net bQceOgbfSazIBDoL5WUD3wOhM/5PnLkBXRh/pLRBr5+1yWcRqb
X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bC0Y0UGIfv2LL/VZloKvna02bH0=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.0
Content-Language: en-CA
In-Reply-To: <hImdnTAH2e6cW-D_nZ2dnUU7-UnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 by: Carlos E.R. - Fri, 13 May 2022 08:52 UTC

On 2022-05-13 04:44, 25.BX945 wrote:
> On 5/12/22 5:08 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2022-05-12, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Todays CDS and players are infinitely better than vinyl, but I am happy
>>> to sell off all my old vinyl at three times the price of getting a CD
>>> replacement of the same album.
>>
>> Assuming it was ever re-released on CD...  :-(
>>
>> In my copious spare time (ha!) I'll have to see about digitizing
>> those oldies but goodies.  I'm already looking into digitizing
>> old videos, although that project is currently also on the back
>> burner.  (Things are getting pretty crowded back there...)
>
>   The hardware/software is more than up to it these days,
>   affordably. Go up to 16-bit A/D resolution if you want,
>   double the CD sampling rate.
>
>   The "Hi-Fi", stereo or not, that appeared in the late 40s
>   could record sounds with considerable fidelity. This can
>   make for great digitizations.
>
>   Now 78rpm records - always a bit tinny plus the Bakelite
>   discs created more surface noise that's hard to filter out.
>   But, if you DO have some rare 78s then DO digitize them to
>   the best of your ability. Publish un-corrected raw files
>   so those now and future CAN clean 'em up to the max. There
>   has been so much pre-ww2 music lost forever already ....

I have a bunch of those.

No idea how to digitize them. What hardware. I don't think I can even
play them.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<t5lnda$f3o$2@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7334&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7334

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 14:45:14 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <t5lnda$f3o$2@dont-email.me>
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me>
<oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
<1HefK.881$5gkf.773@fx37.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 13:45:14 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ee01134d862b766facbb27f719e91f7d";
logging-data="15480"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+DVHW5U61MjaE2/HXWK+vw4dVWrFa7+/0="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fqnnIRC9twCtuNIk1BRhz0jP6ro=
In-Reply-To: <1HefK.881$5gkf.773@fx37.iad>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 13 May 2022 13:45 UTC

On 12/05/2022 22:08, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-05-12, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Todays CDS and players are infinitely better than vinyl, but I am happy
>> to sell off all my old vinyl at three times the price of getting a CD
>> replacement of the same album.
>
> Assuming it was ever re-released on CD... :-(
>
Nearly everything I have on vinyl that is worth getting sorted, is
available - often remastered - on CD

> In my copious spare time (ha!) I'll have to see about digitizing
> those oldies but goodies. I'm already looking into digitizing
> old videos, although that project is currently also on the back
> burner. (Things are getting pretty crowded back there...)
>
That is a horrendous task. I simply binned the VHS and bought the DVDs

--
"If you don’t read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<t5lp5c$uav$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7335&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7335

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 15:15:07 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 121
Message-ID: <t5lp5c$uav$1@dont-email.me>
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me>
<oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
<to-dnd1K1JiVXuD_nZ2dnUU7-RPNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 14:15:08 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ee01134d862b766facbb27f719e91f7d";
logging-data="31071"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+OEJPj1I9eDWhPMGuf6DcO790NS9vLG2g="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:cX+7TgparSLPhWiDuG3Y1ikPGGc=
In-Reply-To: <to-dnd1K1JiVXuD_nZ2dnUU7-RPNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Fri, 13 May 2022 14:15 UTC

On 13/05/2022 03:31, 25.BX945 wrote:
> On 5/12/22 4:47 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 12/05/2022 05:36, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>> On 5/11/22 11:11 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 11/05/2022 15:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>>>> Let's just say that the first digital cameras - often
>>>>>    VGA rez, sometimes a bit worse, where STILL better than
>>>>>    Disk Film
>>>>
>>>> Indeed they were.
>>>>
>>>> My 35mm fuji film was around 3MPx but the grains didn't have square
>>>> edges...todays CCDs match or exceed half plate cameras let alone
>>>> medium format.
>>>
>>>    I still have a few medium-format cameras - Pentax 6x7,
>>>    Mamiya 645 Super .... also some 4x5 Graflex press cameras
>>>    and some big 4x5 studio camera and the body (but no good
>>>    lenses) for an 8x10 studio. Got a few pix from that one
>>>    using a borrowed lens - spectacular.
>>>
>>>    The fold-up "press cameras" are far more practical.
>>>
>>>    Somehow, despite modern sensor rez, the medium-format
>>>    film cameras still make for a "better" picture. It may
>>>    be like the tube-vs-transistor amplifier thing, tek-spex
>>>    ain't the whole of it. Tri-X with dilute HC110 in
>>>    medium and large format makes absolutely splendid pix.
>>>    Plus-X was good too, but you can't get it anymore. Hate
>>>    the T-grain films. I like the "tone" of Tri/Plus-X.
>>>    Same with the double-emulsion expanded-range Verichrome
>>>    Pan. I did get some fair results from B&W chromogenics
>>>    however.
>>
>> I think that  fuzzy grain of emulsion that cover several pixels is
>> less obvious than the square edged pixels.
>>
>> Probably what needs to be done is analogous to the CD techniques of
>> introducing jitter to the output so that there is no 'strobing' effect
>> at subharmonics of the sampling frequency
>>
>> Early D to A converters could indeed suffer from 'crossover'
>> distortion   until the oversampling and pulse width modulations types
>> took over.
>>
>> Todays CDS and players are infinitely better than vinyl, but I am
>> happy to sell off all my old vinyl at three times the price of getting
>> a CD replacement of the same album.
>
>   A pity they never bothered with "Super-CD", using recordable
>   DVD discs ..... a little more A/D range, a little higher
>   sample rate. Most would never hear the diff however (and at
>   my age I couldn't either now) ergo sCD would have been mostly
>   a niche market for the 'snobs'.
>
>   There is a little optical "fuzzing" effect with film that you
>   don't really get with sensors of the same theoretical rez.
>   It's how the input is interpreted by the human eye that
>   really determines quality/aesthetic, not the tek-spex. This
>   is also why so many claim vinyl, matched with tube amps,
>   is "better". Technically it's LESS exact, but how humans
>   HEAR it .....
>
That is what I meant by using added 'noise' so that marginal bits lose
their granularity - It's done with CD players.

Valve (tube) amps had one great advantage and that was the valves were
way less prone to crossover distortion especially at high frequencies.
They were high bandwidth devices inherently. They were also more linear
to start with and ran with less feedback, so that overload tended to be
softer. This is why guitarists like them. So there was a grain of truth
in the 'valves sound better' - against early transistor amplifiers they
did, and they still sound better when pushed past the limits of linear
amplification.

But most of the 'like the sound of vinyl' blah blah is on account of
people growing fond of the inherent resonances in stuff - pickups, tone
arms, turntables, and even whole system acoustic feedback resonances
including loudspeakers. .

CDs are astonishingly accurate and flat, and some people simply don't
like it. Their system sounds now exactly like everyone else's.
Essentially - apart from the loudspeakers - 100% perfect reproduction of
what was on the studio monitors.

Cant have that - no one-upmanship left!
..

>   As for cameras, films never had a "flat" spectral response.
>   Sensors do, or are adjusted to. The un-flatness may be part
>   of the aesthetic appeal. The human eye does not have a "flat"
>   response either - neither in terms of spectrum or intensity.
>
Well its not strictly possible to 100% match real visual spectra onto
RGB percentages anyway, and hue perception is massively subjective.
Laser treatment on my left eye has reduced part of it to monochrome
anyway.. :-)

What I like about CCDs is their massive *dynamic* range. you can
compress that to get useable pictures out of really high contrast stuff,

>   Anyway, I still love the look and feel of medium/large-format
>   chemical photos.

So do I, but I am thinking that the best digital cameras are probably
better. I haven't the cash to find out though

E.g. Fujifilm GFX 100S starts around £5500 without a lens so $7200 US..

But it has 102 mega pixies unner the hood.

--
Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
gospel of envy.

Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<uOwfK.20671$6dof.8961@fx13.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7337&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7337

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx13.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
From: cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me>
<oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
<to-dnd1K1JiVXuD_nZ2dnUU7-RPNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<t5lp5c$uav$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <uOwfK.20671$6dof.8961@fx13.iad>
X-Complaints-To: https://www.astraweb.com/aup
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 17:44:58 UTC
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 17:44:58 GMT
X-Received-Bytes: 1506
 by: Charlie Gibbs - Fri, 13 May 2022 17:44 UTC

On 2022-05-13, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> CDs are astonishingly accurate and flat, and some people simply don't
> like it. Their system sounds now exactly like everyone else's.
> Essentially - apart from the loudspeakers - 100% perfect reproduction of
> what was on the studio monitors.
>
> Cant have that - no one-upmanship left!

Sure there is. Turn up that sub-woofer and make the room shake!
Studio monitors are so booooring.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<tOwfK.20669$6dof.14594@fx13.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7338&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7338

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!tr1.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx13.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
From: cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me> <oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me> <1HefK.881$5gkf.773@fx37.iad> <t5lnda$f3o$2@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <tOwfK.20669$6dof.14594@fx13.iad>
X-Complaints-To: https://www.astraweb.com/aup
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 17:44:57 UTC
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 17:44:57 GMT
X-Received-Bytes: 2258
 by: Charlie Gibbs - Fri, 13 May 2022 17:44 UTC

On 2022-05-13, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 12/05/2022 22:08, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2022-05-12, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Todays CDS and players are infinitely better than vinyl, but I am happy
>>> to sell off all my old vinyl at three times the price of getting a CD
>>> replacement of the same album.
>>
>> Assuming it was ever re-released on CD... :-(
>
> Nearly everything I have on vinyl that is worth getting sorted, is
> available - often remastered - on CD

Nice work if you can get it. I have some really obscure vinyl, though.

>> In my copious spare time (ha!) I'll have to see about digitizing
>> those oldies but goodies. I'm already looking into digitizing
>> old videos, although that project is currently also on the back
>> burner. (Things are getting pretty crowded back there...)
>
> That is a horrendous task. I simply binned the VHS and bought the DVDs

Again, great if the DVDs are available. (Heck, DVDs themselves are
on the decline, pushed out by streaming services as a strategic move.)
But I have some stuff I recorded off the air, including some funky
commercials that I'd like to save. One of these days...

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7339&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7339

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.panix5.panix.com!qz!not-for-mail
From: *...@eli.users.panix.com (Eli the Bearded)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 18:58:30 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Some absurd concept
Message-ID: <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Injection-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 18:58:30 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader1.panix.com; posting-host="panix5.panix.com:166.84.1.5";
logging-data="29204"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
User-Agent: Vectrex rn 2.1 (beta)
X-Liz: It's actually happened, the entire Internet is a massive game of Redcode
X-Motto: "Erosion of rights never seems to reverse itself." -- kenny@panix
X-US-Congress: Moronic Fucks.
X-Attribution: EtB
XFrom: is a real address
Encrypted: double rot-13
 by: Eli the Bearded - Fri, 13 May 2022 18:58 UTC

In comp.os.linux.misc, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2022-05-11 16:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>   If you think 110 was horrible (and it was), towards
>>   the end there was Kodak Disk Film - basically specks
>>   of 8mm movie film stuck to a circular pinwheel card.

I think most of the 110 is horrible rep came from 110 cameras being
cheap shit. The cartridge style made for very easy camera construction,
so it lent itself to cheap cameras. I have a SLR made for 110 film, but
those were rare beasts.

> I heard of it. I wonder what advantage they thought it could have.

Selling more cameras.

Incidentally, both 110 and disc film, by the nature of the well enclosed
film packs, were very easy to use for homemade pinhole cameras.

Elijah
------
has about fifty cameras, film and digital

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<t5o3tb$m06$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7347&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7347

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 12:30:50 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <t5o3tb$m06$1@dont-email.me>
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 11:30:51 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="dfa13472c1aedf3bfca9d2821ac94e75";
logging-data="22534"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+n3WFLWjB2yR5y5MCbjSkjvG671d9vNwQ="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:eSlY8VSoN6YgBTEF59Jqhs8BzOA=
In-Reply-To: <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Sat, 14 May 2022 11:30 UTC

On 13/05/2022 19:58, Eli the Bearded wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.misc, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2022-05-11 16:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>>   If you think 110 was horrible (and it was), towards
>>>   the end there was Kodak Disk Film - basically specks
>>>   of 8mm movie film stuck to a circular pinwheel card.
>
> I think most of the 110 is horrible rep came from 110 cameras being
> cheap shit. The cartridge style made for very easy camera construction,
> so it lent itself to cheap cameras. I have a SLR made for 110 film, but
> those were rare beasts.
>
>> I heard of it. I wonder what advantage they thought it could have.
>
> Selling more cameras.
Actually selling cameras into a very different market - those who
couldn't even load film into a Brownie box camera...IIRC some of te disk
cameras an cassette style cameras were literally buy, click, and take
back to where you bought them, and then you ended up with pictures and
no camera - one time use cheap plastic shit .
The market that now takes selfies on smart phones.

>
> Incidentally, both 110 and disc film, by the nature of the well enclosed
> film packs, were very easy to use for homemade pinhole cameras.
>
Nothing wrong with a good old pinhole camera. I man the average
smartphone camera barely needs a lens ....

> Elijah
> ------
> has about fifty cameras, film and digital

I was staggered to find out that while my old Nikon Fe2s are now worth
what I paid for them 30 years ago, my DX2 is not even worth selling.

And my angenieux zooms are worth more than I paid for them

--
"If you don’t read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<14idnYGgq5dkJOL_nZ2dnUU7-U-dnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7350&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7350

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 09:17:29 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<gridnb9Exc5FTeD_nZ2dnUU7-bOdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<5mi1li-057.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 10:17:29 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5mi1li-057.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <14idnYGgq5dkJOL_nZ2dnUU7-U-dnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 25
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-EMEKRYXS8j5d0q2Mg+Gn//PRnkoxze80qCTAEKls6nQVbaMnnlY4MqVZzoTVDCkb08QWx7Rd1fYgIa7!v8VfJVhqL72Nmlo/xvdm3ap60aM2eIybGGsi8t9Qve40yOuS6dxkjkLn0p1hV+MFeAg9M7AufLpV!hGckr1obbAcgLX/ea7A=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2202
 by: 25.BX945 - Sat, 14 May 2022 14:17 UTC

On 5/13/22 4:49 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2022-05-13 05:30, 25.BX945 wrote:
>> On 5/12/22 7:17 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2022-05-11 16:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>>> On 5/10/22 6:09 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>    If you think 110 was horrible (and it was), towards
>>>>    the end there was Kodak Disk Film - basically specks
>>>>    of 8mm movie film stuck to a circular pinwheel card.
>>>
>>> I heard of it. I wonder what advantage they thought it could have.
>>
>>
>> The camera could be really FLAT - even flatter than a 110.
>
> I think there were cameras using 8 mm movie film. Tiny.

Yep ... I actually hand-developed some of it back in the day.

8mm has horrible rez, esp the color film

BUT, the cameras could be really flat,

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<qpGdnZHh9Yc0IuL_nZ2dnUU7-a3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7351&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7351

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 09:41:45 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me>
<oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
<1HefK.881$5gkf.773@fx37.iad>
<hImdnTAH2e6cW-D_nZ2dnUU7-UnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<4ri1li-057.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 10:41:44 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4ri1li-057.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <qpGdnZHh9Yc0IuL_nZ2dnUU7-a3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 59
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-qvlfc8v6DuF89wny7oyN7d2Uqb1NBWXPsBHq3pnxjrH17lbDgGMpmqJxgMUqsAgmWmgstz3cLe/Mb7R!4iveqk1szJYccQEVZGqnCG/LKENbTzrPSQzcwf0Mppw0loF7gr1fgamhi6E0HkWJv+WS+qfjN0zF!ThK+3v2jiles93IMUW4=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4228
 by: 25.BX945 - Sat, 14 May 2022 14:41 UTC

On 5/13/22 4:52 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2022-05-13 04:44, 25.BX945 wrote:
>> On 5/12/22 5:08 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2022-05-12, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Todays CDS and players are infinitely better than vinyl, but I am happy
>>>> to sell off all my old vinyl at three times the price of getting a CD
>>>> replacement of the same album.
>>>
>>> Assuming it was ever re-released on CD...  :-(
>>>
>>> In my copious spare time (ha!) I'll have to see about digitizing
>>> those oldies but goodies.  I'm already looking into digitizing
>>> old videos, although that project is currently also on the back
>>> burner.  (Things are getting pretty crowded back there...)
>>
>>    The hardware/software is more than up to it these days,
>>    affordably. Go up to 16-bit A/D resolution if you want,
>>    double the CD sampling rate.
>>
>>    The "Hi-Fi", stereo or not, that appeared in the late 40s
>>    could record sounds with considerable fidelity. This can
>>    make for great digitizations.
>>
>>    Now 78rpm records - always a bit tinny plus the Bakelite
>>    discs created more surface noise that's hard to filter out.
>>    But, if you DO have some rare 78s then DO digitize them to
>>    the best of your ability. Publish un-corrected raw files
>>    so those now and future CAN clean 'em up to the max. There
>>    has been so much pre-ww2 music lost forever already ....
>
> I have a bunch of those.
>
> No idea how to digitize them. What hardware. I don't think I can even
> play them.

Periodically, you'll see kinda cheapish turntables that actually
have the ability to digitize the music built right in. You can
just play the records, and create a USB stick at the same time
if you want. You could build such a thing with a Pi+A/D card.

However, this is NOT "quality digitization".

12-bit/64khz sampling rate ... that's not too hard to
achieve with affordable equipment these days. Gives
future restorers enough to work with.

Some people use laser beams to scan the record grooves instead
of creating more wear/damage from using a needle. This is not
a super-cheap approach however. It is appropriate for extremely
rare recordings. There were a lot of the old jazz/blues/honkey-tonk
bands in the 20s/30s who cut maybe a single record, maybe even a
single song, and there were only 100 pressings or so - the idea
was to sell them to businesses for fill-in music between live
bands, not so much for "home consumption".

A lot of What Came To Be derived from those bands, so the
historic significance is high.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<OfCdnfWusNFo5x3_nZ2dnUU7-anNnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7357&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7357

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 23:00:53 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 00:00:50 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <OfCdnfWusNFo5x3_nZ2dnUU7-anNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 53
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-1GGzXOmdZB1NnWsny9Yg5LKlSlAAZ3gplkiFsj6CNQkzSnEZW0Xhcw7QidY8me26AIOAXRVruvbgJiO!vQZVEpCXdIk6lvca+bfNb8hDPEGRqrAxIgxCRM5uD9PEO8kNiuhbnZ5LSiO0QJwS9R2mf3tZQUoW!NXZ5MjU/GAn/ZypIwcA=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3087
 by: 25.BX945 - Sun, 15 May 2022 04:00 UTC

On 5/13/22 2:58 PM, Eli the Bearded wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.misc, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2022-05-11 16:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>>   If you think 110 was horrible (and it was), towards
>>>   the end there was Kodak Disk Film - basically specks
>>>   of 8mm movie film stuck to a circular pinwheel card.
>
> I think most of the 110 is horrible rep came from 110 cameras being
> cheap shit. The cartridge style made for very easy camera construction,
> so it lent itself to cheap cameras. I have a SLR made for 110 film, but
> those were rare beasts.

Ummm ... I've actually hand-developed 110 film. It wasn't
just the cameras ...........

It's basically 1/4 35mm ... and 35mm can be pretty damned
grainy already.

Which is why I put the $$$ into medium format.

Disc film was basically 1/4 110 .........

>> I heard of it. I wonder what advantage they thought it could have.
>
> Selling more cameras.

110 came well before digital, but disc came just
about the same time as VGA-rez digital. I see it
as a last gasp. In either case, you'd get a nice,
pocketable-sized camera and they could charge
the same to develop the film as they did with
35mm+ film. I still have at least one "pocket
size" 110 camera in The Heap somewhere ... but
new film would be a Do-It-Yerself at this point,
cutting down 35mm, paper backing ......

> Incidentally, both 110 and disc film, by the nature of the well enclosed
> film packs, were very easy to use for homemade pinhole cameras.

I guess that would be true - but there are limited uses
for pinhole cameras. The depth-of-field from f90 *is*
impressive though.

>
> Elijah
> ------
> has about fifty cameras, film and digital
>

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<FJCdnRaiK6elHx3_nZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7358&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7358

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 23:31:52 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
<t5o3tb$m06$1@dont-email.me>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 00:31:51 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <t5o3tb$m06$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <FJCdnRaiK6elHx3_nZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 81
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-gxQFxKigLcZTtSqK9BtKyLc47EySrW833z6Ww4pV5lo2sN/LEYobFnD9nFWeOaLw/+HokJ4C09gYdmp!mMYCc8tNHId0hkcOZFELZN5oZX1GGLSTLNNrlf6j7nlt58cSwOaO/Ylaa3rbbRzDkyn3sWKXeeRH!bmKJhgQhcrdW8ltjlnw=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4519
 by: 25.BX945 - Sun, 15 May 2022 04:31 UTC

On 5/14/22 7:30 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 13/05/2022 19:58, Eli the Bearded wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.misc, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2022-05-11 16:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>>>     If you think 110 was horrible (and it was), towards
>>>>     the end there was Kodak Disk Film - basically specks
>>>>     of 8mm movie film stuck to a circular pinwheel card.
>>
>> I think most of the 110 is horrible rep came from 110 cameras being
>> cheap shit. The cartridge style made for very easy camera construction,
>> so it lent itself to cheap cameras. I have a SLR made for 110 film, but
>> those were rare beasts.
>>
>>> I heard of it. I wonder what advantage they thought it could have.
>>
>> Selling more cameras.
> Actually selling cameras into a very different market - those who
> couldn't even load film into a Brownie box camera...IIRC some of te disk
> cameras an cassette style cameras were literally buy, click,  and take
> back to where you bought them, and then you ended up with pictures and
> no camera - one time use cheap plastic shit .

Actually, 127 filled THAT role just fine ... and it
had almost as many square-MM as 35. You could get
bearable enlargements from 127. The cameras were
pretty cheapo however - but that meant more would
buy them.

The "disposable" cameras - didn't those come AFTER
digital ??? Basically stiff cardboard bodies. If
you didn't take lots of pix they really were a
good option, a lot cheaper than a "real" camera
OR a digital. Rent-a-Cam ....

> The market that now takes selfies on smart phones.
>
>>
>> Incidentally, both 110 and disc film, by the nature of the well enclosed
>> film packs, were very easy to use for homemade pinhole cameras.
>>
> Nothing wrong with a good old pinhole camera. I man the average
> smartphone camera barely needs a lens ....

There are arrays on chip now that really DON'T need
a lens - and you can shift where they're pointing
electronically - best used for jitter-elimination -
by tweaking electrical fields. Dunno if any have hit
the market yet, but they will.

>
>> Elijah
>> ------
>> has about fifty cameras, film and digital
>
> I was staggered to find out that while my old Nikon Fe2s are now worth
> what I paid for them 30 years ago, my DX2 is not even worth selling.

Don't have any - got an FM2 though. Do-it-yerself
photography, the olde-fashioned way. Won't ever
sell it.

Have an N2000 ... 3.3mp ... takes regular batteries.
It DOES have one especially redeeming feature - the
auto-exposure will accommodate REALLY long exposure
times - like 3+ minutes if needed. This is great for
certain kinds of nighttime shots. Took some in a
hurricane zone once - all the leaves had been blown
off the (remaining) trees. Scary-looking midnight
shots .....

Oddly, maybe it's "spectral response" or something,
sometimes those 3.3mp pix look more aesthetic than
those from the 16/24mp successors which tend to
look kinda "poster" to my eye.

> And my angenieux zooms are worth more than I paid for them

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<FbudncvE3twxGx3_nZ2dnUU7-LOdnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7359&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7359

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 23:50:52 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <678nki-gfq.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<eli$2205091259@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5gjn3$290$1@dont-email.me>
<oLednQSvLcxDE-H_nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5ihjb$jts$1@dont-email.me>
<to-dnd1K1JiVXuD_nZ2dnUU7-RPNnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5lp5c$uav$1@dont-email.me>
<uOwfK.20671$6dof.8961@fx13.iad>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 00:50:52 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <uOwfK.20671$6dof.8961@fx13.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <FbudncvE3twxGx3_nZ2dnUU7-LOdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 18
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-umCVWIBv7aQQ+0ORNFMOpCoQOb64zF8t/yRr4G9i1t7cOZYkpPFYD0Pcinj5gn6dKIYXUA2oi37Vtsa!PUDltnlPGyMtv5Jqs9rgdYp66gKPp2G2e6yyex6Y/+jMZ6/yqg65XX5vAJc4kt3g4XYmAk+UvJnN!bPRamzJeOsLBjRXV1tk=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2226
 by: 25.BX945 - Sun, 15 May 2022 04:50 UTC

On 5/13/22 1:44 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-05-13, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> CDs are astonishingly accurate and flat, and some people simply don't
>> like it. Their system sounds now exactly like everyone else's.
>> Essentially - apart from the loudspeakers - 100% perfect reproduction of
>> what was on the studio monitors.
>>
>> Cant have that - no one-upmanship left!
>
> Sure there is. Turn up that sub-woofer and make the room shake!
> Studio monitors are so booooring.

Heh heh ... got a pair of 15" subs. When The Levee Breaks
sounds fantastic - like a storm coming over the hill.

But for the higher notes, Magneplanars - pure "transparency"

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<dSdgK.56565$qMI1.25659@fx96.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7361&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7361

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!peer02.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx96.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
From: cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf> <t5o3tb$m06$1@dont-email.me> <FJCdnRaiK6elHx3_nZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 79
Message-ID: <dSdgK.56565$qMI1.25659@fx96.iad>
X-Complaints-To: https://www.astraweb.com/aup
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 21:00:57 UTC
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 21:00:57 GMT
X-Received-Bytes: 4594
 by: Charlie Gibbs - Sun, 15 May 2022 21:00 UTC

On 2022-05-15, 25.BX945 <25BZ495@nada.net> wrote:

> On 5/14/22 7:30 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 13/05/2022 19:58, Eli the Bearded wrote:
>>
>>> In comp.os.linux.misc, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2022-05-11 16:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>     If you think 110 was horrible (and it was), towards
>>>>>     the end there was Kodak Disk Film - basically specks
>>>>>     of 8mm movie film stuck to a circular pinwheel card.
>>>
>>> I think most of the 110 is horrible rep came from 110 cameras being
>>> cheap shit. The cartridge style made for very easy camera construction,
>>> so it lent itself to cheap cameras. I have a SLR made for 110 film, but
>>> those were rare beasts.
>>>
>>>> I heard of it. I wonder what advantage they thought it could have.
>>>
>>> Selling more cameras.
>>
>> Actually selling cameras into a very different market - those who
>> couldn't even load film into a Brownie box camera...IIRC some of te disk
>> cameras an cassette style cameras were literally buy, click,  and take
>> back to where you bought them, and then you ended up with pictures and
>> no camera - one time use cheap plastic shit .
>
> Actually, 127 filled THAT role just fine ... and it
> had almost as many square-MM as 35. You could get
> bearable enlargements from 127. The cameras were
> pretty cheapo however - but that meant more would
> buy them.

Ah, good old 127... when I were a lad my first camera was
a Brownie that took 127.

> The "disposable" cameras - didn't those come AFTER
> digital ??? Basically stiff cardboard bodies. If
> you didn't take lots of pix they really were a
> good option, a lot cheaper than a "real" camera
> OR a digital. Rent-a-Cam ....

They had a cheap plastic case in a cardboard box. My introduction
to underwater photography came when Ikelite produced a housing that
would let you take one down to 130 feet. They used a standard roll
of 35mm film, but shot it in reverse direction; it started out with
all of the film pulled out of the canister, rolled up, and stuffed
into a compartment. As you advanced the film it would be rolled
into the canister, and after your last shot a few extra strokes
of the film advance pulled the end into the canister - no rewinding
required. (This was all invisible to J. Random Luser, though.)

I found out that you could reload these cameras. Since the exposed
film was already pulled into the canister, it was just a matter
of carefully prying up a few tabs to split the camera in two and
retrieve the film. (You didn't need the cardboard box, and could
discard it.) The flash was powered by a single AA cell, which you
could replace if it ran out.

To load a new roll you needed a changing bag. Place the camera
pieces into the bag, along with a fresh roll of film. Working by
touch, pull the film out of the canister, roll it up, stuff it into
the compartment, put the canister into the other side, and snap the
halves of the camera together. At this point you can take the camera
out of the bag and you're ready to go.

The cameras were loaded with ASA 400 film; when I started shooting
macro (yes, Ikelite provided an adapter lens and framer), most of
my shots were over-exposed. There was no exposure control, but I
found that by loading the camera with ASA 200 film things came out
just right. I used Velvia and got some pretty nice shots.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<yfydnctNooIXTBz_nZ2dnUU7-L_NnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7363&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7363

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!rocksolid2!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 23:22:34 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
<t5o3tb$m06$1@dont-email.me> <FJCdnRaiK6elHx3_nZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<dSdgK.56565$qMI1.25659@fx96.iad>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 00:22:33 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <dSdgK.56565$qMI1.25659@fx96.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <yfydnctNooIXTBz_nZ2dnUU7-L_NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 114
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-rMIIbuFFWY4A/gXIkYX6vD5u0mywSmpPe+G21qjTy5v1wu6vK9FjoGaC8Wjzb4pCwYtKfPtp4AShsKC!6bU+58DKRl88nXT7x/j78SQNFtvQJhI40DaDul/ZF/9Ka7TkcDR24myq5d4hcUM1KCY85maEHKTU!Qbs9/S23Ddx/i72TaIQ=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 6807
 by: 25.BX945 - Mon, 16 May 2022 04:22 UTC

On 5/15/22 5:00 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-05-15, 25.BX945 <25BZ495@nada.net> wrote:
>
>> On 5/14/22 7:30 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 13/05/2022 19:58, Eli the Bearded wrote:
>>>
>>>> In comp.os.linux.misc, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2022-05-11 16:01, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>     If you think 110 was horrible (and it was), towards
>>>>>>     the end there was Kodak Disk Film - basically specks
>>>>>>     of 8mm movie film stuck to a circular pinwheel card.
>>>>
>>>> I think most of the 110 is horrible rep came from 110 cameras being
>>>> cheap shit. The cartridge style made for very easy camera construction,
>>>> so it lent itself to cheap cameras. I have a SLR made for 110 film, but
>>>> those were rare beasts.
>>>>
>>>>> I heard of it. I wonder what advantage they thought it could have.
>>>>
>>>> Selling more cameras.
>>>
>>> Actually selling cameras into a very different market - those who
>>> couldn't even load film into a Brownie box camera...IIRC some of te disk
>>> cameras an cassette style cameras were literally buy, click,  and take
>>> back to where you bought them, and then you ended up with pictures and
>>> no camera - one time use cheap plastic shit .
>>
>> Actually, 127 filled THAT role just fine ... and it
>> had almost as many square-MM as 35. You could get
>> bearable enlargements from 127. The cameras were
>> pretty cheapo however - but that meant more would
>> buy them.
>
> Ah, good old 127... when I were a lad my first camera was
> a Brownie that took 127.

I have an actual Brownie ... it's brown. Can't get
any film for it anymore - but, in theory, it can
be made from 120/220/70mm ... alas the trick is in
making a compatible paper backing. I don't think
they've made 620 since the mid 90s.

I was fond of Verichrome Pan in 620 (and others). An
interesting film - dual emulsion, slow and fast. You
could capture a bright sunlit scene AND still get
detail in the deep shadows. Nice silvery tone. Good
digitals could probably fake it these days, either
through extended range sensors OR by taking two photos
1/500th apart at different ASAs and then combining
the images (25% fast + 75% slow ?). Not sure they
could achieve that "tone" however.

The 127 cartridge cameras were pretty popular. A lot
easier to deal with than winding film between spools
and the cameras were cheap enough so you didn't feel
ripped-off. Kinda like Gillette - the theory was to
basically give away the camera and make yer money
on the film/developing/printing. For awhile it seemed
like everybody was using 127 - until 110. Alas it
was hopeless making enlargements from 110 - 3-1/2"
standard snapshot prints were about it.

>> The "disposable" cameras - didn't those come AFTER
>> digital ??? Basically stiff cardboard bodies. If
>> you didn't take lots of pix they really were a
>> good option, a lot cheaper than a "real" camera
>> OR a digital. Rent-a-Cam ....
>
> They had a cheap plastic case in a cardboard box. My introduction
> to underwater photography came when Ikelite produced a housing that
> would let you take one down to 130 feet. They used a standard roll
> of 35mm film, but shot it in reverse direction; it started out with
> all of the film pulled out of the canister, rolled up, and stuffed
> into a compartment. As you advanced the film it would be rolled
> into the canister, and after your last shot a few extra strokes
> of the film advance pulled the end into the canister - no rewinding
> required. (This was all invisible to J. Random Luser, though.)
>
> I found out that you could reload these cameras. Since the exposed
> film was already pulled into the canister, it was just a matter
> of carefully prying up a few tabs to split the camera in two and
> retrieve the film. (You didn't need the cardboard box, and could
> discard it.) The flash was powered by a single AA cell, which you
> could replace if it ran out.
>
> To load a new roll you needed a changing bag. Place the camera
> pieces into the bag, along with a fresh roll of film. Working by
> touch, pull the film out of the canister, roll it up, stuff it into
> the compartment, put the canister into the other side, and snap the
> halves of the camera together. At this point you can take the camera
> out of the bag and you're ready to go.
>
> The cameras were loaded with ASA 400 film; when I started shooting
> macro (yes, Ikelite provided an adapter lens and framer), most of
> my shots were over-exposed. There was no exposure control, but I
> found that by loading the camera with ASA 200 film things came out
> just right. I used Velvia and got some pretty nice shots.
>

They produced OK snaps ... but WERE about as cheap as you
could possibly mass-produce a film camera.

But, as I said, it was a price/use thing. If you wanted to
take pix at an event or something you could buy one of
those disposables real cheap. Didn't have to buy an SLR
or digicam for $100-$1000

They were probably a good way for Kodak to get rid of its
outstanding film inventory - seeing that digital was the
up and coming thing. I think Fuji made disposicams too.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<t5t1q4$h6g$2@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7364&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7364

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tnp...@invalid.invalid (The Natural Philosopher)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 09:25:40 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <t5t1q4$h6g$2@dont-email.me>
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
<t5o3tb$m06$1@dont-email.me> <FJCdnRaiK6elHx3_nZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<dSdgK.56565$qMI1.25659@fx96.iad>
<yfydnctNooIXTBz_nZ2dnUU7-L_NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 08:25:40 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="63f43bd92d5db5277125799988aff5d8";
logging-data="17616"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+ixF6Uym8aXw7jiO1K7ez7pTmJzP9974c="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:IyAtLGD0hdXPUEvnVbKvAyxkxaU=
In-Reply-To: <yfydnctNooIXTBz_nZ2dnUU7-L_NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: The Natural Philosop - Mon, 16 May 2022 08:25 UTC

On 16/05/2022 05:22, 25.BX945 wrote:

>   I have an actual Brownie ... it's brown. Can't get
>   any film for it anymore - but, in theory, it can
>   be made from 120/220/70mm ... alas the trick is in
>   making a compatible paper backing. I don't think
>   they've made 620 since the mid 90s.

120 is still made, - its 620 on a spool

--
Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
gospel of envy.

Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<cqBgK.60140$qMI1.59193@fx96.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7365&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7365

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx96.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
From: cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
<t5o3tb$m06$1@dont-email.me>
<FJCdnRaiK6elHx3_nZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<dSdgK.56565$qMI1.25659@fx96.iad>
<yfydnctNooIXTBz_nZ2dnUU7-L_NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<t5t1q4$h6g$2@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <cqBgK.60140$qMI1.59193@fx96.iad>
X-Complaints-To: https://www.astraweb.com/aup
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 23:49:28 UTC
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 23:49:28 GMT
X-Received-Bytes: 1790
 by: Charlie Gibbs - Mon, 16 May 2022 23:49 UTC

On 2022-05-16, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 16/05/2022 05:22, 25.BX945 wrote:
>
>>   I have an actual Brownie ... it's brown. Can't get
>>   any film for it anymore - but, in theory, it can
>>   be made from 120/220/70mm ... alas the trick is in
>>   making a compatible paper backing. I don't think
>>   they've made 620 since the mid 90s.
>
> 120 is still made, - its 620 on a spool

A different spool, IIRC. My father's camera took 620,
which came on a spool. It looked to be the same size
as 120 - I couldn't figure out why one film was almost
exactly unlike the other (thank you, Douglas Adams).

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<bNidnUfVk5jDtR7_nZ2dnUU7-YfNnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7366&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7366

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 23:45:17 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
<t5o3tb$m06$1@dont-email.me> <FJCdnRaiK6elHx3_nZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<dSdgK.56565$qMI1.25659@fx96.iad>
<yfydnctNooIXTBz_nZ2dnUU7-L_NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5t1q4$h6g$2@dont-email.me>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 00:45:17 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <t5t1q4$h6g$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <bNidnUfVk5jDtR7_nZ2dnUU7-YfNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 41
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-ZcdjkmChHWtPs0PStBJ0ZpQeRhqdGdeXi5hvtoynURaX+xVvR/cmJDrIoJaIDkFdhjr2t7/6KdHYgCu!WG2p5Hxwbow6CZIm6Rvaw5MG9UNko/F/P+W0RTVhlJrEyhaTnkO0t1HVIDtZ59jvdqi+050TKWka!5pAjYzAoob3GD1ctO3Q=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3040
 by: 25.BX945 - Tue, 17 May 2022 04:45 UTC

On 5/16/22 4:25 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 16/05/2022 05:22, 25.BX945 wrote:
>
>>    I have an actual Brownie ... it's brown. Can't get
>>    any film for it anymore - but, in theory, it can
>>    be made from 120/220/70mm ... alas the trick is in
>>    making a compatible paper backing. I don't think
>>    they've made 620 since the mid 90s.
>
> 120 is still made, - its 620 on a spool

Well, in a cartridge ...

620 however had an opaque paper backing, and the
film was literally taped to it at either end.
You watched the frame numbers go by in the little
round red window on the back of the camera.

So, to replicate 620 you'd have to make your own
version of the opaque paper backing (and get the
thickness right). 620 film itself was more like
220, physically thinner than 120 and a tad prone
to droop in regular cut-plate enlarger film
holders.

Some MIGHT have some of those old paper backings
lying around - but MOST just threw them away.
Usually Kodak yellow robust paper with some REALLY
black black stuff on one side.

So, for now, 620 is not entirely out of reach, but
you'll have to reach way way up on the top shelf,
so to speak. Eventually, 120/220 are gonna go away
alas ......

Still pissed nobody made a proper digital back for
my Pentax 6x7. More of them were made than the
subsequent P67s ..... 60-80 megapixel oughtta do ...
is it SO much to ask ? :-)

Now 6x6 Blads - all you want - but at $$$$$$$$$$$

Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")

<UOSdnS0mh9Qzrx7_nZ2dnUU7-XvNnZ2d@earthlink.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=7367&group=comp.os.linux.misc#7367

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 00:29:18 -0500
Subject: Re: SD cards and camera ("scanner")
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <eli$2205072025@qaz.wtf> <c7qpki-4fs.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>
<8padnRzLYatLXOb_nZ2dnUU7-c3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<hu6vki-t6f.ln1@Telcontar.valinor> <eli$2205131457@qaz.wtf>
<t5o3tb$m06$1@dont-email.me> <FJCdnRaiK6elHx3_nZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
<dSdgK.56565$qMI1.25659@fx96.iad>
<yfydnctNooIXTBz_nZ2dnUU7-L_NnZ2d@earthlink.com> <t5t1q4$h6g$2@dont-email.me>
<cqBgK.60140$qMI1.59193@fx96.iad>
From: 25BZ...@nada.net (25.BX945)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 01:29:17 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <cqBgK.60140$qMI1.59193@fx96.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <UOSdnS0mh9Qzrx7_nZ2dnUU7-XvNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 78
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.77.165.67
X-Trace: sv3-Z5TGAZCxOuiEZ8W/WYsnDLJRSNV1dNhAXl1cPQ2qBL3HXspwLxy0AovnWp3lamoaKLIHEPN1Q6psQBl!8RX9RPCh5Fp5yc/uZFKIkWMMw3SIhqadw+d8LiMlMJmmdXHVZipjJ/u6dLwMZzXoUk6/Y1wu04Uw!oUt6fiTmkRjeOYoT1J8=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5009
 by: 25.BX945 - Tue, 17 May 2022 05:29 UTC

On 5/16/22 7:49 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-05-16, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 16/05/2022 05:22, 25.BX945 wrote:
>>
>>>   I have an actual Brownie ... it's brown. Can't get
>>>   any film for it anymore - but, in theory, it can
>>>   be made from 120/220/70mm ... alas the trick is in
>>>   making a compatible paper backing. I don't think
>>>   they've made 620 since the mid 90s.
>>
>> 120 is still made, - its 620 on a spool
>
> A different spool, IIRC. My father's camera took 620,
> which came on a spool. It looked to be the same size
> as 120 - I couldn't figure out why one film was almost
> exactly unlike the other (thank you, Douglas Adams).

620, thickness of 220, was meant for older-style cheaper
cameras and was taped to an opaque paper backing. You
threaded it, rolled it through, and then sent the take-up
spool to the lab. 120/220 comes in a cassette, 35mm on
steroids. You thread, shoot, then REWIND it into the
cassette.

Anyway, it worked well enough ... but over half the
thickness of the spool was the paper backing, thus
usually limiting you to 12 exposures per roll.

There were some odd cameras that took 620 that had
good lenses and were as sharp as any more expensive
medium-format (though the f-number of the lenses was
usually inferior). "Brownies" and their ilk had kinda
crappy lenses, "good enough" for consumer snaps. The
larger format helped hide the lens lackings.

At least in the Americas, THE most popular film for
consumer-grade 620 cameras was VeriChrome Pan. This
was an ususual film. It basically had two emulsion
coatings - a silver-rich lower-speed emulsion plus
a higher-speed emulsion. My guess is that the high
speed contributed maybe 25% to the overall equation.

This gave it fantastic latitude, important for
unskilled consumers with cameras that only had
extremely limited (or no) speed/ap settings. Most
"Brownies" were f8/125th and that was that. Ergo
the film had to accommodate a huge range of lighting
situations.

With Verichrome Pan, an automated printing machine could
make acceptable standard snap prints even if the film
was vastly under or over-exposed. You'd get an OK image
even if the negs looked almost clear, or almost black.

But PROPERLY used, Verichrome Pan could produce images
you can barely do on modern expensive digitals with
extended-range sensors. Consider a bright sunlit open
field or desert, but with some people sitting in deep
tree shadows. With VC they'd ALL be quite visible. VC
also had an interesting "tone" and was great for
landscape photos. It'd reproduce what your minds-eye saw
and had more "depth" than Tri-X and more "silvery" look
than Plus-X (which always seemed kinda muddy to me, ok
for portraits though).

BUT, even if you can tweak digital to emulate the range
of VC ... the PRINTING media still doesn't do it justice.
The old premium silver-rich chemical printing papers
impart a certain depth I've never seen in any printing
device, even really expensive ink or dye-sub printers.
At the higher-end at least, "analog" photography still
beats digital :-)

And then there are platinum/palladium prints ....
and for color there are dye-transfer prints. Yum.

OK ... maybe more info than you needed .......

Pages:123
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor