Amen,
At 11:27 AM 9/4/2002 +0300, you wrote:
>Mike wrote:
>
>MI> Q15: What is the image capture resolution?
>MI> A15: Approximately equivalent to 18 Megapixels (2000 x 3000 x 3 channels).
>MI> Digital PIC output is essentially the same as C-41 processed film
>scanned on a
>MI> high quality DML s
Alin Flaider wrote:
> MI> Q15: What is the image capture resolution?
> MI> A15: Approximately equivalent to 18 Megapixels (2000 x 3000 x 3
> channels). MI> Digital PIC output is essentially the same as C-41
> processed film scanned on a MI> high quality DML scanner.
>
>They must be taking t
Mike wrote:
MI> Q15: What is the image capture resolution?
MI> A15: Approximately equivalent to 18 Megapixels (2000 x 3000 x 3 channels).
MI> Digital PIC output is essentially the same as C-41 processed film scanned on a
MI> high quality DML scanner.
They must be taking their retailers for c
"Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is interesting - is this in commercial use now? I remember hearing
> of a techology which could scan film without developing, but destroyed
> the film in the process - is this the very same?
Yes. The very same process was announced a few years ago.
September 2002 16:11
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: OT: Applied SciFi blooper
>
>
> Just spotted one in a CVS dowstairs. Looks like... well,
> applied scifi. You insert a roll of film, in 10 minutes it
> develops the negs and then you can print it, you can get the
> s
Just spotted one in a CVS dowstairs. Looks like... well, applied scifi. You
insert a roll of film, in 10 minutes it develops the negs and then you can
print it, you can get the scanned CD.
Almost wanted to try it, until... "to ensure your privacy, your negatives will
be delivered on a CD, and th
6 matches
Mail list logo