Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 14, 2004, 1:42 PM   #11
frontier02's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 56

Harryed: nothing to do with the topic, but you live in a beautiful place. I was stationed there in 65-66, and my 2 sons were camping at Deception Pass last week. One son lives in Olympia and the other in VA. As I work for the Navy, I get up to the Northwest quite a bit -- Silverdale, Bangor, Bremerton, Everett, etc.
frontier02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2004, 5:32 PM   #12
harryed's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 30


You sure are right about this corner of the world. We spent a few days camping at Deception Pass this summer too. I also work for the Navy and can't imagine a better place to live and work.
harryed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2004, 5:44 PM   #13
Senior Member
Wildman's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 544

Me too... retired in Coupeville seven years ago from San Diego. This is a very photogenic place. Folks who only visit during the summer miss out on the beautiful misty winter scenes on this beautiful place.
Wildman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2004, 9:14 PM   #14
Senior Member
Alan T's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 2,980

johncudd wrote:
what resolution is the photos at when they put them on a photo cd?
On the Photo CDs I've had done here in the UK from film recently, there are folders of jpeg images containing....

Large: 1536x1024, approx 250-500KB;

Medium: 768x512: approx 100-200KB;

Small: 384x256 : approx 30-60KB.

There's also "thumb" and "tiny", even worse.

None of these formats will remotely approach the quality you'd get from a 3Mpixel digital camera, but of course you'll still have your SLR negatives. To get the best digital images out of your negatives, and to surpass even a very cheap digicam, you'll have to buy a filmscanner for several hundred dollars, and invest lots of effort in getting the scans right. Or you can pay for photographic enlargements from your negs.

I started in digital 5 yrs ago as you're doing, with my old film SLR. I bought a filmscanner, and I saved jpeg images around 3600x2400; 1-2MB, i.e, about 4 timesas many pixels as the 'large' PhotoCD resolution. I got excellent results, but the work involved in scanning and twiddling was enormous. Dust is a big problem. It's like doing your own photographic processing, but less messy. Once I had a 3Mpixel Olympus and then a 5Mpixel Casio digicam, I soon got excellent results much more easily, and my SLR kit went into retirement.

If I were you I'd a get a cheap but flexible digicam, and start experimenting with it straight away, with a view to comparing its results with your PhotoCDs from your film SLR. I only go back to film now with the surprisingly good throwaway 35mm cameras that I issue to my family for holidays when I don't trust them with a cheap digicam. I get a set of prints and a PhotoCD via my local camera shop. This summer I bought for 128 ukpounds an excellent 3Mpixel Jenoptik 3.1z3 digicam, and lent it to the same family members, and the results are far superior. It hasn't got the controls of a better digicam or an SLR, but I still carry it around myself quite often because it can go everywhere, which my big digicams and my SLR can't.

Good luck

Alan T is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:14 AM.