ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Future of Photography (was RE: filmscanners: real value?)



Hi, Berry!

D'Ohhh!!!   You are quite right... That's what I get for posting at the end
of a long day!   

Sorry about the confusion!  Since we are actually 8X closer to that 30Mpixel
goal mentioned earlier than I calculated, I concede that it is POSSIBLE that
we may see a 30Mp camera come down in price to be affordable by the serious
hobbyist in ten years.  My concerns about the size of the sensor still
stand, but this amount of improvement might be achieved in ten years.

I guess I need to polish my brain and calculator more than my ball... ;-)

Guy Clark

-----Original Message-----
From: Berry Ives [mailto:yvesberia@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 8:35 PM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: Re: Future of Photography (was RE: filmscanners: real value?)


on 1/30/01 2:32 PM, Clark Guy at guy.clark@sbt.siemens.com wrote:

> Hi, Michael!
> 
> Uhh... 35Mb file at 24bits per pixel corresponds to what...  1.45 million
> pixels.  That's just 8 bit color.
> 
Haven't you confused bits with bytes?  24 bits is 3 bytes.  35 MB--not 35
Mb--would give you 35 MB/3B = 11+ megapixels.

--Berry
 




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.