When did the first consumer level digital cameras hit the market?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Gary Edstrom, Nov 27, 2007.

  1. Gary Edstrom

    Neil Ellwood Guest

    I t depends on the process. I used Ferraniacolor until 3M took them
    over and improved the film so that the quality was completely ruined.

    I used some plastic bowls half full of water at the correct temp. each
    one with an aquarium thermometer in it; all the solutions stayed in
    the bowls until needed and the film had a first rinse at the working
    temp.

    All worked well and I have about a thousand slides that have lasted
    for 40 years or so.
     
    Neil Ellwood, Nov 28, 2007
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Gary Edstrom

    Mr. Strat Guest

    I only processed Ektachrome when clients needed it in a hurry. I didn't
    mind doing it, but the temperature specs were much more strict than
    C-41 (which I also did).
     
    Mr. Strat, Nov 28, 2007
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Gary Edstrom

    George Kerby Guest

    The mot fun with E-3 processing (early Infrared Ektachrome) was in the
    middle of the processing. The film was physically "reversed" by opening the
    container, unspooling the film, and turning on bright lights for the
    reversal process, then trying to get the wet film back on the ElNikor
    stainless steel reels. Seeesh!
     
    George Kerby, Nov 28, 2007
    #23
  4. Gary Edstrom

    just bob Guest

    Ah, the Oly D-500L. At the time I remember being amazed at the quality and I
    was very proud in my choice. Unfortunately we loaned it out a few too many
    times and someone must have dropped it and I still remember how mad I was
    when I found out. But our next one was a Oly D40 and that one lasted for
    years until I gave it to one of my kids! Doh!
     
    just bob, Nov 28, 2007
    #24
  5. Gary Edstrom

    Mr. Strat Guest

    I remember, but think I only did that once.

    And I made a mistake. I didn't do C-41...I just did R-4 chemistry for
    printing negatives. Jeez...it was so long ago and I don't miss spending
    3 or so hours every night in the darkroom.
     
    Mr. Strat, Nov 28, 2007
    #25
  6. Gary Edstrom

    mianileng Guest

    It just so happens that I read your post a few minutes after I'd
    finished enlightening my nephew on the subject. Quite a
    coincidence. He thought there was something wrong with his SD
    card and asked me to check it with my computer. The card contained
    pictures of his 5-month old son, with the date stamped on each
    shot. He thought the date stamps made the pictures look real
    amateurish, but wanted to keep a record of the date they were taken.
     
    mianileng, Nov 28, 2007
    #26
  7. Gary Edstrom

    Scott W Guest

    Having the camera add the data to the image is not needed, you can use a
    program like IrfanView to add the date in batch mode, keeping the
    originals date free.

    Scott
     
    Scott W, Nov 28, 2007
    #27
  8. I've seen and made some A4 prints (297 x 210mm) from a 990 and they're
    fine at our normal viewing distance. But expecations differ.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 28, 2007
    #28
  9. Gary Edstrom

    acl Guest

    But if you look at it from the scientifically determined optimum
    distance of 1.5m it should be fine :)
     
    acl, Nov 28, 2007
    #29
  10. Gary Edstrom

    mianileng Guest

    My nephew didn't really want to make the date visible on each
    picture. He disliked it very much in fact. He just wanted to be
    able to check back on the date in the future, but didn't know
    that such a thing as the EXIF data exists - just like Gary before
    he was enlightened and, I suspect, a lot of casual snapshooters.
     
    mianileng, Nov 28, 2007
    #30
  11. Gary Edstrom

    Scott W Guest

    When I was thinking about replacing the 995 with a camera that had more
    pixels I did a test by shooting a scene at zoomed most of the way out,
    then re-shot the center zoomed in by about a factor of two. I then
    scale the two photos to match, pasted the two together and make a 8 x 10
    print, you could sure tell the center was far sharper then the rest of
    the image.

    What got me looking at this was my 4x6 inch prints looked very sharp,
    but the 8x10 not so much. In fact a careful view of the 4x6 inch prints
    showed there was not much more detail that could be seen in the same
    image printed as an 8 x 10.

    Scott
     
    Scott W, Nov 28, 2007
    #31
  12. Gary Edstrom

    George Kerby Guest

    I miss my brown fingernails....
     
    George Kerby, Nov 29, 2007
    #32
  13. Gary Edstrom

    Paul J Gans Guest

     
    Paul J Gans, Nov 29, 2007
    #33
  14. Gary Edstrom

    John Navas Guest

    To promote D-620L (and D-400) the following year, Oly gave them out to
    those of us covering COMDEX (an event I miss), and I remember thinking
    it was pretty fun and handy, although I used images from my film SLR in
    my coverage of the event, not the Oly. I nonetheless kept and used the
    D-620L until I replaced it with a C-2500L, one of my favorite cameras
    ever. I likewise added a D40Z later, which I still keep in the glove
    box of my car and use from time to time.
     
    John Navas, Nov 30, 2007
    #34
  15. Gary Edstrom

    John Navas Guest

    Even today!
     
    John Navas, Nov 30, 2007
    #35
  16. Gary Edstrom

    John Navas Guest

    I had one of those too, and I generally agree, although I got some
    pretty good 8x10 prints when I took the time to shoot carefully.
     
    John Navas, Nov 30, 2007
    #36
  17. Gary Edstrom

    Walter Banks Guest

    My first digital camera was Casio QV-10 It came out about 1995 about 0.3 mpixel in high res mode. It had enough memory to save 95 images, just about the same number that a good fresh set of 4 AA batteries would last. The QV-10 was one of the first mass
    produced digital camera's

    There were a few digital cameras before the QV-10 most relatively low resolution. I had a friend with a digital SLR that was a regular SLR with a digital back. It was a one off that cost him about $10K that was 93/94 it had 240,000 pixels.

    w..
     
    Walter Banks, Nov 30, 2007
    #37
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.