P3D Re: Digital vs. film

[Tom Deering <tmd@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dale said:
>Then I discovered that the Kodak disk images
>were 600 x  400 pixels in size. The Konica Q-Mini provides 640 x 480
>pixels.

I think the disk you got was intended for consumer use, like web pages and
so forth.  In order to get 36 photos on a diskette, they would have to have
been highly compressed, and would not be expected to compare well with a
scanned photo, or a digital camera.  Conversely, if you squish your scans
and digital photos down to 28K, they won't look so hot, either.

On the other hand, if you get your photos on a Kodak Photo-CD, you will get
multiple resolution images as large as 3000x2000 pixels, far higher than
any digital camera.  These bad boys are way better than you can get from
scanning a snapshot.  But these super high resolution pictures are like
fifteen meg each, and you can't get 36 of them on a floppy.

If you want to "see and compare the results from Kodak's (expensive)
digital processing equipment", then get a Photo-CD.  It seems unfair to
judge Kodak's "very expensive equipment" using the compressed, necessarily
crappy images you received squeezed on a diskette.

Tom



------------------------------