DSLR sales static, mirrorless heavy growth?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Jul 20, 2012.

  1. RichA

    Trevor Guest

    "Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >> Not at all, I don't give a rats arse about your net cop antics.

    >
    > As I don't give a rats ass for your bullshit, lies and deception.


    Funny, you haven't shown where there has been any bullshit, lies or
    deception, other than that I don't agree with yours!

    Trevor.
     
    Trevor, Jul 29, 2012
    #41
    1. Advertising

  2. Eric Stevens <> wrote:

    [sending a photo via cellular way back]

    > In those days it could equally well have been a GIF.


    Sure, if it had just 256 colours (or bad posterization).
    Was it black and white only?

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Jul 31, 2012
    #42
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <310720122205196086%>, Elliott Roper
    <> wrote:

    > > [sending a photo via cellular way back]
    > >
    > > > In those days it could equally well have been a GIF.

    > >
    > > Sure, if it had just 256 colours (or bad posterization).
    > > Was it black and white only?

    >
    > Another candidate is Quicktake. Apple proprietary, but they were among
    > the few with affordable digital cameras.


    he said it was with a nikon d1 in 1999, so it wasn't a quicktake.

    in any event, the quicktake had its own image format as well as
    standard formats, including jpeg and tiff. if he did use a quicktake,
    he'd have sent the jpeg.
     
    nospam, Jul 31, 2012
    #43
  4. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > >> In those days it could equally well have been a GIF.

    > >
    > >Sure, if it had just 256 colours (or bad posterization).
    > >Was it black and white only?

    >
    > Newspaper. In those days, black and white, of course.


    of course, not.

    newspapers could print colour photos since *well* before 1999. a prime
    example is usa today, which is all colour and began publishing in 1982.
     
    nospam, Aug 1, 2012
    #44
  5. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > >> > > In those days it could equally well have been a GIF.
    > >> >
    > >> > Sure, if it had just 256 colours (or bad posterization).
    > >> > Was it black and white only?
    > >>
    > >> Another candidate is Quicktake. Apple proprietary, but they were among
    > >> the few with affordable digital cameras.

    > >
    > >he said it was with a nikon d1 in 1999, so it wasn't a quicktake.

    >
    > Here we go again. I didn't say that at all.
    >
    > " I remember a time even before Nikon produced the D1 in 1999."


    thanks for the correction, nevertheless, it was almost guaranteed to be
    a jpeg.
     
    nospam, Aug 1, 2012
    #45
  6. Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 21:59:34 -0400, nospam <>
    >>In article <>, Eric Stevens


    >>> >> In those days it could equally well have been a GIF.


    >>> >Sure, if it had just 256 colours (or bad posterization).
    >>> >Was it black and white only?


    >>> Newspaper. In those days, black and white, of course.


    >>of course, not.


    >>newspapers could print colour photos since *well* before 1999. a prime
    >>example is usa today, which is all colour and began publishing in 1982.


    > Please explain from where you gained your knowledge of the printing
    > capabilities and practices of the Wellington newspapers pre 1999.


    http://garciamedia.com/blog/article...y_a_three_minute_interview_with_richard_curt/
    | We begin in 1982 by using a LOT of color, some of that not
    | as smartly as we use it today. In those early days, we used
    | it because (a) we could; and (b) it made us different from
    | every other newspaper (a key marketing strategy that should
    | not be forgotten). A lot of things played into our strategy;
    | color was just one of them.

    | Most folks won’t remember but we didn’t have full color
    | on every section front when we began. On the Money and Life
    | fronts, we only had spot-color blue (100% cyan). It was only
    | a year or so later (I don’t remember exactly), that those
    | sections got full color.
    | [...]
    | We started with a 48-page maximum with 16 pages in color.

    http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2498358
    | Coklor press rotograveur on newsprint started in 1978. Long before
    | that on glossy, coated paper that news inserts/magazines were
    | printed on. Register problems on light weight paper prevented good
    | four-color registration until roll presses improved. Sheet-fed
    | presses printed credible color images before 1968 - but it was
    | expensive until soy inks came along. ANything else you want
    | to know?

    http://www.nyu.edu/classes/stephens/Collier's page.htm
    | The second period when sensationalism seemed to increase in
    | American newspapers began with the "new journalism" of Joseph
    | Pulitzer. Pulitzer, who created the St. Louis Post-Dispatch
    | in 1878 and then took over the New York World in 1883, was an
    | unusually aggressive, demanding and intelligent editor, who
    | fought important crusades on behalf of workers, immigrants and
    | the poor. He was a major innovator, particularly in his Sunday
    | paper to which he added expanded women's and sports pages and
    | the first color comics in a newspaper.
    | ^^^^^

    http://books.google.de/books?id=JOI...American Journalism" "The Yellow Kid"&f=false
    aka
    http://preview.tinyurl.com/bnhad25
    proves first colour newspaper prints were in 1893. (Comic "The
    Yellow Kid", in "New York World", coining the "Yellow press")


    It would be an easy guess that nospam has access to such and
    similar resources. Newspapers didn't have to be black and white,
    certainly not in 1999. Many were not. Others had colour photos
    regularly. Until you have clear proof that NONE of the Wellington
    newspapers and NONE of the papers using that photo could have
    printed anything in colour, or you have clear proof that none of
    the newspapers printed the photo in colour (this may require you
    to look in all the archives) ... it may well have been in colour.

    "Newspaper. In those days, black and white, of course." has been
    truly discredited.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 4, 2012
    #46
  7. Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    > On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 22:35:23 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    >>Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 21:59:34 -0400, nospam <>
    >>>>In article <>, Eric Stevens


    >>>>> >> In those days it could equally well have been a GIF.


    >>>>> >Sure, if it had just 256 colours (or bad posterization).
    >>>>> >Was it black and white only?


    >>>>> Newspaper. In those days, black and white, of course.


    >>>>of course, not.


    >>>>newspapers could print colour photos since *well* before 1999. a prime
    >>>>example is usa today, which is all colour and began publishing in 1982.


    >>> Please explain from where you gained your knowledge of the printing
    >>> capabilities and practices of the Wellington newspapers pre 1999.


    [proof]
    > That's not a Wellington newspaper.


    [proof]
    > That's not a Wellington newspaper.


    [proof]
    >>"Newspaper. In those days, black and white, of course." has been
    >>truly discredited.


    > THat's not a Wellington newspaper either.


    I See. Wellington newspapers are 150 to 200 years behind current
    technology, because it takes at least 100 years to reach that
    colony far amongst the stars. Sending the plans and How Tos'
    via wireless doesn't work either --- for some reason they aren't
    able to produce colour in newspapers.

    This being the case, the image may well have been sent
    uncompressed. Which would be about as large as a GIF compressed
    B/W image. (I wonder, how did they even get digital cameras
    and found out aboout GIF?)


    > I don't know quite when the Wellington newspapers started printing
    > colour but I think it was shortly after the time with which we are
    > concerned.


    I think that "I think" is a great argument, much better than proof.
    Going into the archives of your newspapers and looking certainly
    is much worse than "I think" --- and it proves far less.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 6, 2012
    #47
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. anthonyberet

    How heavy is a litre of heavy water?

    anthonyberet, Apr 4, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    11,011
    tadchem
    Apr 10, 2004
  2. Alan Browne

    Digital camera sales growth to slow

    Alan Browne, Feb 11, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    452
    Alan Meyer
    Feb 12, 2005
  3. thing2
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    317
    thing2
    Feb 22, 2006
  4. Rich
    Replies:
    61
    Views:
    2,374
    Bob Larter
    Jul 13, 2009
  5. Rich

    Cruddy P&S sales drop for Sony, DSLR sales jump

    Rich, Aug 1, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    476
Loading...

Share This Page