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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mishedlo who wrote (99167)	5/2/2001 11:13:47 PM
From: Tom M	Respond to of 436258

<for average JOE and that is 90% of the market, digital cameras are a wonder and that is where we are headed.> hi mishedlo, I had integrated the first generations of the logitec digital camera in an expert system I developed in the early 90's for disaster recovery planning. Nobody had a clue to the poor resolution vs film, except for some Kodak comments at the time that said if Kodak had just come out with their film resolution after the first digital cameras, Wall St. would bill them as the best invention of the century <G>. That aside, it's the "and that is where we are headed" comment that got me as my Audio-CD-recording-nephew recently asked me for my old turntable because he heard at college that albums could be better than some CDs. The generation I thought was so dumbed down are discussing continuous analog vs sampled digital recording! And I saw a row of vinyl albums at my local CD store for the first time ever (has always been CD's). Perhaps the "new era" generation is starting to question convention? regards, Tom

To: mishedlo who wrote (99167)	5/2/2001 11:47:48 PM
From: benwood	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Remember what film format used to be peddled to the masses? 626 cartridges, and worse, the 110 format (good for blowups to driver's license size). Digital will eat that market up once the printing is convenient and as cheap.

To: mishedlo who wrote (99167)	5/3/2001 1:03:39 AM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Just spent a weekend visiting a friend in NYC who works at Biz Week as a photo editor and she was complaining about how much time she now spends downloading images from the web these days for use in the magazine. But then she was also complaining about having to do returns of the conventional film. Ever have a magazine lose an original? It's a nightmare keeping track of returns. Thing is that the digital image doesn't have to be as good as film, it only has to be as good as the reproduction for the publication. For a weekly news magazine like Business Week, time is of the essence. Same with most of the jobs I work on. Most are ads or commercial marketing pieces and they are always running up against some kind of impossible deadline. For the longest time the printers didn't want to take digital images because they wanted to maintain control over the separation process. This is still true to a certain extent, but more and more my guys are delivering via the web or on a CD. They aren't handing off film. I was in an old client's studio the other day and he showed me the B&W out of the latest Nikon digital camera....it's every bit as good as an image from a Hassleblad 2 1/4. The color isn't quite there yet, but the B&W sure is and that's a camera that uses standard Nikon lenses and is priced in the ball park of a professional Nikon film camera. The great thing about digital color though is that you have white balance in the camera. You have no idea how happy this makes my guys that have to work in mixed lighting situations all the time.