Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Nikon

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Nikon

 
 
Chris Malcolm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2008
David J Taylor <(E-Mail Removed)-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
> Chris Malcolm wrote:
> []
>> Why don't you hear people in music shops asking for an instrument with
>> more notes?


> You can tune and tweak many instruments to get as many notes as you want!
> And then there is the string section, and trombones....


That's true, but the more you make the less you can tell the
difference. There's a limit to how many different notes the best human
ear can hear, quite apart from the restricted range of our own
personal ears.

--
Chris Malcolm http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2008
Chris Malcolm wrote:
> David J Taylor
> <(E-Mail Removed)-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
>> Chris Malcolm wrote:
>> []
>>> Why don't you hear people in music shops asking for an instrument
>>> with more notes?

>
>> You can tune and tweak many instruments to get as many notes as you
>> want! And then there is the string section, and trombones....

>
> That's true, but the more you make the less you can tell the
> difference. There's a limit to how many different notes the best human
> ear can hear, quite apart from the restricted range of our own
> personal ears.


Were that the same was true with eyes! I believe that I have been able to
see quantisation even in 24-bit displays ("16 million colours") if the
colours are carefully chosen to be adjacent (G=50, B=51 etc.) and the
image chosen to maximise quantisation visibility (slow changes across the
display, "circular greyscale"). Hence my comment that "thousands of
colours" would stop me purchasing a camera.

The trouble is that, with using LCD displays (as opposed to CRT) you never
know where you are with colour (it could even be 6-bits per channel, and
goodness knows what calibration), and I also watch some digital TV
(FreeView) and you have no idea how the bit-rate reduction there may have
damaged the original.

Cheers,
David


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John Turco
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-27-2008
nospam wrote:
>
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, ASAAR
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > Many dolts also support Canon, Fuji, Kodak,
> > Minolta, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax and Sony cameras.

>
> don't forget sigma.



Hello, nospam:

Why? Sigma is quite forgettable, if nothing else.


Cordially,
John Turco <(E-Mail Removed)>
 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Malcolm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-27-2008
David J Taylor <(E-Mail Removed)-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
> Chris Malcolm wrote:
>> David J Taylor
>> <(E-Mail Removed)-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Chris Malcolm wrote:
>>> []
>>>> Why don't you hear people in music shops asking for an instrument
>>>> with more notes?

>>
>>> You can tune and tweak many instruments to get as many notes as you
>>> want! And then there is the string section, and trombones....

>>
>> That's true, but the more you make the less you can tell the
>> difference. There's a limit to how many different notes the best human
>> ear can hear, quite apart from the restricted range of our own
>> personal ears.


> Were that the same was true with eyes! I believe that I have been able to
> see quantisation even in 24-bit displays ("16 million colours") if the
> colours are carefully chosen to be adjacent (G=50, B=51 etc.) and the
> image chosen to maximise quantisation visibility (slow changes across the
> display, "circular greyscale"). Hence my comment that "thousands of
> colours" would stop me purchasing a camera.


> The trouble is that, with using LCD displays (as opposed to CRT) you never
> know where you are with colour (it could even be 6-bits per channel, and
> goodness knows what calibration), and I also watch some digital TV
> (FreeView) and you have no idea how the bit-rate reduction there may have
> damaged the original.


It's obvious what's going to happen if you leave digitisation quality
in the hands of someone who is going to profit from underestimating
the capacity of human senses. I reluctantly accept the bland
cartoonish plasticisation of digital TV as a worthwhile trade off
which gives me in return more reliable noise-free reception, more
channels, etc..

It's a shame the purveyors of digital sound broadcasting couldn't have
rested content with CD quality, and rather disgusting that the BBC,
who used to lead the world in broadcast sound quality, have made such
a greedy pig's breakfast of digital radio "quality". The compression
artefacts annoy me even when listening to the news despite my ears
being far too old to be able to hear TV pictures or bats.

--
Chris Malcolm (E-Mail Removed) DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

 
Reply With Quote
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-27-2008
Chris Malcolm wrote:
[]
> It's obvious what's going to happen if you leave digitisation quality
> in the hands of someone who is going to profit from underestimating
> the capacity of human senses. I reluctantly accept the bland
> cartoonish plasticisation of digital TV as a worthwhile trade off
> which gives me in return more reliable noise-free reception, more
> channels, etc..
>
> It's a shame the purveyors of digital sound broadcasting couldn't have
> rested content with CD quality, and rather disgusting that the BBC,
> who used to lead the world in broadcast sound quality, have made such
> a greedy pig's breakfast of digital radio "quality". The compression
> artefacts annoy me even when listening to the news despite my ears
> being far too old to be able to hear TV pictures or bats.


Chris,

I still have FM analogue radio here, and it's fine for my purposes. My
radio news is restricted to BBC Radio 3. I do agree with you about the
trade-off with digital TV, although I would prefer less quantity and more
quality (both of the broadcast material and the technical transmission
aspects). Fewer, higher-quality channels.

Cheers,
David


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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 Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon 8800 vs Nikon 990 vs Canon 8MP Rebel vs Nikon D70 fj40rockcrawler@gmail.com Digital Photography 10 06-07-2005 06:53 PM
Does SC-12 TTL Flash cable - for Nikon F3, provide full TTL flash capability with newer Nikon units like SB-80 ? H. Brinkman Digital Photography 0 08-09-2003 10:15 AM
Nikon Coolpix 775 or Nikon Coolpix 2500 Larry R Harrison Jr Digital Photography 0 08-02-2003 03:17 PM
Re: Nikon D100/Nikon N80; same exposure? MarkH Digital Photography 6 07-15-2003 05:51 AM
Re: Nikon D100/Nikon N80; same exposure? Tom Thackrey Digital Photography 0 07-14-2003 05:35 PM



Advertisments