Comments on: The Cost of Memory http://cow.neondragon.net/index.php/2018-The-Cost-Of-Memory Helping you to get the most out of modern technology and communications since 2004. Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:38:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Wolven http://cow.neondragon.net/index.php/2018-The-Cost-Of-Memory/comment-page-1#comment-1347 Wolven Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-1347 Indeed, you're more likely to run out of holiday to take pictures of. Indeed, you’re more likely to run out of holiday to take pictures of.

]]> By: Tim http://cow.neondragon.net/index.php/2018-The-Cost-Of-Memory/comment-page-1#comment-1348 Tim Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-1348 <p>Impressively cheap, but not like-for-like. You won't even get the resolution of film (digicam = 3000 to 3800px wide (10MPel); somewhere around 6-7000px wide for a 35mm frame on a dedicated film-scanner, up to 20,000px wide for a 5x4" frame), let alone the same grain effects or colour-depth of a transparency, and as for movements and satisfaction of running off your own b&w prints in the darkroom...</p><p> But really the first question you should be asking is: how many of this bulk of photos will you remember, in their post-processed state, one year later? There's a strong likelihood that, for those photos you pre-visualised and spent time over, you'll remember the photo itself; however, the real shame is when you find a photo you'd forgotten that reminds you of the place later. </p> Impressively cheap, but not like-for-like. You won’t even get the resolution of film (digicam = 3000 to 3800px wide (10MPel); somewhere around 6-7000px wide for a 35mm frame on a dedicated film-scanner, up to 20,000px wide for a 5×4" frame), let alone the same grain effects or colour-depth of a transparency, and as for movements and satisfaction of running off your own b&w prints in the darkroom…

But really the first question you should be asking is: how many of this bulk of photos will you remember, in their post-processed state, one year later? There’s a strong likelihood that, for those photos you pre-visualised and spent time over, you’ll remember the photo itself; however, the real shame is when you find a photo you’d forgotten that reminds you of the place later.

]]> By: Ramble http://cow.neondragon.net/index.php/2018-The-Cost-Of-Memory/comment-page-1#comment-1352 Ramble Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-1352 Memory always gets cheaper as density and new manufacturing processes get used.<br />It's bloody great.<br /> Memory always gets cheaper as density and new manufacturing processes get used.
It’s bloody great.

]]> By: Xeen http://cow.neondragon.net/index.php/2018-The-Cost-Of-Memory/comment-page-1#comment-1356 Xeen Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-1356 <p>On that megapixels crap:</p><p>http://geekologie.com/2006/11/megapixels_just_dont_matter.php</p><p>Sure, megapixels might help if you want to print to 2x2 meters and use it as an actual wallpaper. Other than that, 5 megapixels are fine. If you use a good printer and photo paper the results on A4 (normal page size) are pretty decent. Hardly anyone sees any difference, and even if, they have to take a very very close look. So, better look out for a good objective and a good sensor (the one that determines which color... there are two variants - one that rules and one that sucks, forgot their names though) instead of looking for trillions of pixels.</p> On that megapixels crap:

http://geekologie.com/2006/11/megapixels_just_dont_matter.php

Sure, megapixels might help if you want to print to 2×2 meters and use it as an actual wallpaper. Other than that, 5 megapixels are fine. If you use a good printer and photo paper the results on A4 (normal page size) are pretty decent. Hardly anyone sees any difference, and even if, they have to take a very very close look. So, better look out for a good objective and a good sensor (the one that determines which color… there are two variants – one that rules and one that sucks, forgot their names though) instead of looking for trillions of pixels.

]]>