Hi John, For one thing many folks may not have sent you the huge multimegabyte full sized pictures, since that takes a lot of bandwidth. What counts are a. the number of pixels total, the number of colors per pixel, the quality of the lens and ccd matrix. For a low cost camera I bought an Agfa 1280. although it's total pixel count is not so high, and it has now been discontinued, it had an adapter ring size the same as many of the old film movie cameras, so close-up and telephoto lens extensions are easily available and cheap. It makes some very crisp close up shots. And zooms over a reasonable range. You might look at daves digital camera page on the net for reviews and tests and pictures made with a number of digital cameras. Many now have the resolution and size equivalent of larger than an 8 x 10 photograph, Still, who wants to receive a 12 meg photo file in the email??
Good Luck! Edley. From: "John Carmichael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Roger Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Copies to: "Sundial List" <sundial@rrz.uni-koeln.de> Subject: Maximizing photo quality Date sent: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 09:19:36 -0700 Send reply to: sundial@rrz.uni-koeln.de Hello Bill & Roger: After having reviewed and edited at least a couple hundred photos sent to me from everybody at the conference, I had a chance to compare the photo qualty produced by several different methods. My goal was to find out which method produced the finest and sharpest digital on screen viewing resolution. This is what I learned: 1. The worst quality photos are produced from scanning prints. 2. The best quality photos (taken at about 4 ft. distance) were taken on Bill's handheld digital 4 megabyte Olympus Camedia D-40. 3. Roger's method of having a photoshop digitally develop his 35mm film directly onto a CD produced excellent results far better than scanning, but still not as good as Bill's digital camera. 4. Digital CD's from film are somewhat expensive at 17 dollars for 24 exposures. Roger and I have been thinking that his film on CD method is best because we were both scared of the high cost of good digital cameras. Also, I don't think the cheaper digital cameras have interchangeable lenses for close-ups or telephoto shots. (or do they?) So here's my two questions to Bill: 1. How much did your camera cost (If you don't mind telling)? 2. Does your camera have changeable lenses? 2. Since it is digital, can you make a close-up shot digitally without a close up or telephoto lens? 3. How close to your subject can you get and still stay in focus? (Watch out Bill, Roger's liable to designate you official photographer at the Conference in Banff!) John John L. Carmichael Jr. Sundial Sculptures 925 E. Foothills Dr. Tucson Arizona 85718 USA Tel: 520-696-1709 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: <http://www.sundialsculptures.com> - -
