Path: internal1.nntp.ash.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ash.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ash.giganews.com!firehose2!nntp4!intern1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed.tpinternet.pl!news.atman.pl!news.intercom.pl!f124.n480!f127.n480!f112.n480!f200.n2432!f605.n774!f500.n123!f2000.n106!f3.n10!f1324.n202!f300.n202!f801.n202!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: fido.photo
Distribution: fido
From: "WAYNE_B_YOUNG@HOTMAIL.COM"
 
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 03 23:55:02 +0100
Subject: Re: Photo processing
Message-ID: 
Organization: Fanciful Online, San Diego, CA
 111
Lines: 83
Xref: intern1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com fido.photo:464

Received: by fanciful.org (Wildcat! SMTP Router v5.6.450.8)
          for photo@fanciful.org; Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:55:33 -0800
Received: from ns5.tzo.com ([216.55.16.67]) HELO=saf.tzo.com
          by fanciful.org (Wildcat! SMTP v5.6.450.8) with SMTP
          id 171550015; Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:55:31 -0800
Received: from 207.68.164.63 by saf.tzo.com
 id 2003111502531121049 for photo@fanciful.org;
 Sat, 15 Nov 2003 07:53:11 GMT
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
  Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:55:06 -0800
Received: from 24.87.26.66 by sea2-dav55.sea2.hotmail.com with DAV;
 Sat, 15 Nov 2003 07:55:06 +0000
From: "Wayne Young" 
To: 
References: 
Subject: Re: Photo processing
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:55:02 -0800
Message-ID: 
FILETIME=[C8D464E0:01C3AB4D]

Hi, Bob4!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: 
To: 
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 06:44 PM
Subject: Re: Photo processing


> Hello Wayne
>
> I missed this reading on Docs pure FIDO, sorry I've been down with the
flu.

Good to see you bouncing right back, nothing can keep a good man down!
I got my flu shot this morning, and it gave me a bit of a headache above the
right temple all day...

> -> Yes, I actually meant to say How many photos PER SECOND at 5- to
> -> 7-megapixels per photo?
>
> Oh I understand now, like 3 CCD's means larger pixel sizes for the video..
> Not the way it works, three CCD's are used for color purity, if you record
red
> on one CCD then when moving the camera the retention of red isn't as apt
to
> wipe out the next color being written to that space.  I'm no physicist,
but
> have used both camcorders, the single CDC is more contrasty and in many
> instances appears to be sharper that the 3 CCD camcorders, however color
> purity and unwanted artifacts are much better with a the multiple ccd
> camcorders.  Especially if you have a movement taking place where shadow
> become bright light, like a person walking in front of a window.

Yes, the 3 ccd model is comparable to the 3-gun projection TVs, great for
huge pictures
but at close look it is not as sharp as the matrix TV.

My question was still incomplete and lacking clarity. Let me try again:
In the film type camera with motor drive, it can fire off up to 5 or 6
frames per second,
each frame can be as full in picture elements as a frame fired off in a
single-shot mode.
Now in the digital cameras, most of them can not capture the full 5- or
6-megapixels per frame.
That was why I said the film camera still has an adventage over the digital
cameras, and so those
photographers who do not have digital camera yet do not need hold back from
speaking up...

-Wayne