P3D Re: The future (digital vs. film)

["Greg Wageman" <gjw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

From: Brian Reynolds <reynolds@xxxxxxxxx>


>In my experience the poor resolution available on the LCD view screens
>isn't even as good as that on a Lubitel or Sputnik, let alone a 35mm
>SLR.  The LCD viewing screens are barely acceptable for checking
>composition (you can't check critical focus), and for working the
>camera features that the manufacturer didn't provide other controls
>and indicators for.

I have to agree.  It's impossible to check precise focus given the poor
resolution of the LCD.  As for composition, the LCD on my digicam
doesn't show the full image that will be captured, although I know of
some SLRs that don't show exactly what you'll get on film, either.

>Given over 150 years of large format and medium
>format cameras you have to wonder why the makers of the digicams
>haven't thought to provide a collapsible shade for the LCD finders.


Many of the digital still cameras seem to have been designed by the
video camera department.  Many of them look, feel, and operate like the
current generation of video cameras, with the built-in color LCD screens
off to the side of a swivelling lens assembly.  Those LCDs don't have
shades, either.

>The D1 (if it's the one I'm thinking of) is bascially a Nikon F5 with
>a CCD back, a large battery pack, and a hard disk.  Kodak (with their
>DSC cameras), and later Nikon and Canon, has been making these
>cameras, or ones like them, for a number of years.  They are more
>expensive than their film counterparts, heavier, and still have lower
>image quality than film.  They were originally marketed to the AP and
>UPI wire services.  One of the services used them for a while and then
>switched back to film.


If I'm not mistaken, NASA uses one of the Kodaks on Shuttle missions.
Probably saves them quite a bit of effort in processing and scanning
film, in addition to allowing "instant" availability of images (a
digital download via TDRS vs. waiting for the physical film to be
returned to earth).  The high-end Kodak has around 6 megapixels.  This
is quite close to film resolution for the 35mm format.

You're overlooking the fact that the full resolution of film isn't
needed for most consumer applications.  Something like 95% or more of
photos shot by consumers are never reprinted, and certainly never
enlarged beyond the 4x6 inch prints that come back from the developer.
My 1.2 megapixel digicam produces sufficient resolution at 1024x768
resolution to make 3x5 inch printed images that rival film.  Just don't
blow them up.

     -Greg W. (gjw@xxxxxxxxxx)