WDC/Sandisk Corporation Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : WDC/Sandisk Corporation

WDC 163.00

-0.4%

Nov 7 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (17849)	12/31/2000 12:55:31 PM
From: Andre Williamson	Read Replies (2) of 60323

On card size - In my recent experience, 64MB is usually sufficient. I take only the highest res pictures my coolpix 800 will allow (a little less than 1MB/picture in 1600x1200 jpg). Until I recently got a 48MB card, I was using two 16s and a 24, and never really filled them up. However, I don't have a 3.3 or larger camera, nor do I take uncompressed tiff files. Steve has raised this repeatedly; I have done a little reading and can't quite figure out, from a practical standpoint, why a little compression leaves one with 'substandard' files. But if raw, uncompressed files are superior, then these would require not only faster cameras but faster cards and much larger cards. The vast majority of users IMO are not willing to wait more than a few seconds between pictures - and we're far from that at this point - but if important, this does mean there is room for growth in the market for much larger cards. Andre

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next