Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mauser96 who wrote (32248)	9/24/2000 10:40:35 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

Luke, Good questions about how the typical user will use their digital camera. I think the biggest question is: how many of those pictures will be deleted soon (immediately) after they are taken because they aren't good enough to keep. Ironically, the more expensive it is to store each picture, my guess (but it's just a guess) is that the more discriminating people will be about keeping those snap shots. The questions that are raised about how the various products requiring storage will be used and the unknown answers to them make it more evident about the efficacy of waiting until tornados form before buying enabling technologies. I waited until that happened before buying SanDisk. Wish we'd done the same with Citrix. :) --Mike Buckley

To: mauser96 who wrote (32248)	9/25/2000 11:08:30 AM
From: Thomas Mercer-Hursh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

In a few years this will probably be around 10 MP or so, Look back in the thread a week or two and you will find my discussion of a 4Kx4K or 16Mp option which should be in professional cameras within a year, possibly in a three chip solution, one per color, or 48Mp. I've had a recent discussion with one of my sources of "wisdom" in this area. One of the things he talked about was a new Fuji professional camera ... not sure of the resolution, but it had some fancy tricks in how the pixels were laid out and on-board software support that resulted in better quality images than equivalent resolution cameras of more standard manufacture. The software also provides some neat value add like highlighting areas of over and underexposure. While no camera has it yet, there is another nice software piece that could be added to change the shape of the response curve, thus providing an solution to some of those difficult exposure problems right in the camera. I think this is an important aspect of digital photography, i.e., that because it is electronics, the potential for value add in additional systems and software control is potentially huge. And, oh yes, the Fuji comes with a 1GB hard disk, not flash. He also had some print samples from the new six color Epson printers. The image source for these was from slide film scanned in a high resolution film scanner, thus far above current digital camera sources, but a gap that is obviously closing. The images were stunning ... difficult to believe that they were not color prints. Whatever happens with digital cameras, the prospects for the digital darkroom are clearly very impressive. The latest Epson's have an option for pigment based inks instead of dye with 100 year archival capability.

To: mauser96 who wrote (32248)	9/26/2000 7:21:20 PM
From: russet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

<<<The resolution af digital still cameras is growing very rapidly. The newest ones have 3.3 megapixels. In a few years this will probably be around 10 MP or so, which should satisfy most quality needs at the consumer level. How are these images going to be stored on Compact Flash without spending a fortune? >>> I see from ads on TV that Sony is covering all memory bases with its digital still cameras. They make cameras using memory cards, 3.5 inch computer disks, hard drives, standard 8 mm magnetic tape, and write to CD's. Perhaps they don't want another "Beta" blowout (gggggggg).

To: mauser96 who wrote (32248)	9/30/2000 9:51:39 PM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Lucius, DIGITAL FILM I am responding to your post from one week ago. Thanks for bringing up some important points... If CompactFlash doesn't fall in price fast, it will be cheaper for average (occasional) users to rely on film. I think your comments on digital photography are important. There still are some kinks to be worked out. As someone stated recently on this thread, the value chain is still short one important link, image viewing. The current paradigm is a permanent hard copy. Cost is a second important area. The initial investment plus printing costs is a vital consideration. Try to justify your digital camera purchase by exploring new ways to share pictures with family and new ways to view photos. There is some value in the convenience of digital photography, but it requires one to actually go without hard copies for the time being, unless you are a serious hobbyist and decide to purchase a high resolution inkjet printer. It is currently feasible to take flash memory cards to some standard film labs for prints using the same process as 35mm film, and at a reasonable cost. In a few years...[upper end digital camera resolution]... will probably be around 10 MP or so, which should satisfy most quality needs at the consumer level. How are these images going to be stored on Compact Flash without spending a fortune? Specifically regarding image resolution, I think your concerns are valid, but recall that file sizes of less than 500KB are perfectly adequate for 4x6 and 5x7 prints in cameras with 2.1 megapixel resolution and above. Most of the following photos have file sizes under 50KB. To view file size, right click the photo and click "properties"... albums.photopoint.com Here is a link that outlines consumer purchasing habits in the aftermarket... Through our research, we found that the majority of aftermarket buyers purchase memory cards from 32 Mb to 48 Mb, opting to increase their capacity to what would typically be a roll of film or enough for a short vacation of shooting. Please see this link for more details and a description of bundled and aftermarket flash memory card sales... Message 14485532 As you see, most users have no need for large, uncompressed images and therefore can do without high capacity flash memory cards. If you are worried about cost, SanDisk and Toshiba just announced as single 512Mbit chip which will allow 64 megabytes of storage. Just a year or so ago SanDisk and most competitors needed four (4) 128 Mbit chips to make the same card. Costs will fall! Best, Aus