If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#791
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?
On Dec 7, 4:52 pm, "William Graham" wrote:
"Scott W" wrote in message news:0ed994cd-6434-4b0f-8b76- An average person can resolve 0.7 line pairs per minute. It takes at least 2 pixels to make a line pair so the minimum you would need to match the human eye is 1.4 pixels per minute. But 2 pixels/min is the minimum, because of how the phasing occurs you really would like to have about 1.5 times that amount, or about 2.1 pixels minute. I wonder what Ted William's eyes could resolve? - Here is an excerpt from his bio: "Williams, doctors said, could see at 20 feet what people with normal eyesight see from 10. Armed forces ophthalmologists said his eyesight was so keen it was a one-in-100,000 proposition. " I knew a guy in the Navy that could see the mast of ships peeking out over the horizon when the rest of the ship was below it. They kept that poor slob on the bridge 24-7.......He would say, "There's a ship over there, sir" and you would look through these huge 20x binoculars, and see the tip of a mast bobbing up and down, "over there". His name was Hooper, and he was from San Francisco.....He was the only person I ever knew that could sleep standing up leaning against a post..... Let's thaw out his head and see what it can do. Scott |
#792
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?
In rec.photo.digital.zlr AndrewR wrote:
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 02:32:06 -0800 (PST), wrote: A clue for all the useless idiots, just like this one. Get your nose off of your monitor with those pop-bottle-bottom nerd glasses of yours with +10 diopter correction in them. View a 1024x768 display from a distance that provides a TRUE 30-40 degree FOV only. Don't be so ****ingly stupid. Do the math on a 17" monitor with a width of 13+" on how far away you have to view it. I hope it doesn't shock you too much to discover that some of us are intelligent enough to have done that already. It's very simple school trig which people who are used to it can do in their heads. As for the moron that says 2.3' of arc are easily discerned by most humans, there's another ****ingly useless troll revealing himself. I used to host astronomer's events and would often ask the general public how many stars they could see in Epsilon Lyrae. If lucky maybe 10% of them would raise their hands on being able to see 2 stars there. What ****ingly useless, inexperienced, misinformation-spewing, and amazingly ignorant trolls. You don't have much experience with discussing things, do you? Let me just ask you one question. Think of those people in your life who were educational beacons, people who knew much more than you did. How many of those people were more foul mouthed than you are when they came across someone who didn't know something that they did? It's my own experience that people who swear a lot are either ignorant or mentally ill. I just wondered if that was your experience too. -- Chris Malcolm DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] |
#793
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?
On Dec 8, 12:48 am, AndrewR wrote:
View a 1024x768 display from a distance that provides a TRUE 30-40 degree FOV only. Don't be so ****ingly stupid. I don't need to repeat what four others have now pointed out about your errors, Mr Magoo. But I will repeat - this idiocy is a very useful, telling reflection of your complete incompetence and ridiculously low standards. It's good to see it only took about two weeks for your true colors to be revealed to all. But do, oh do, keep posting these long diatribes. It'll keep you off the streets. (O: |
#794
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?
Chris Malcolm wrote:
In rec.photo.digital.zlr AndrewR wrote: What ****ingly useless, inexperienced, misinformation-spewing, and amazingly ignorant trolls. You don't have much experience with discussing things, do you? Let me just ask you one question. Think of those people in your life who were educational beacons, people who knew much more than you did. How many of those people were more foul mouthed than you are when they came across someone who didn't know something that they did? Bad question I'm afraid! I'd be willing to bet that one of the major reasons he knows so little and is so rude is that his experience growing up *is* what you ask above. The adults in his life probably knew little and were abusive and foul mouthed when somebody else did. For example, I'm always amused when I hear parents berating their teenager children as assholes... because invariably the kids are! They are just like their parents... It's my own experience that people who swear a lot are either ignorant or mentally ill. I just wondered if that was your experience too. I don't know about that... I don't tend to swear much when I write, but my vocal skills include the common use of useful selection of cuss words. However, there is a time and a place, too. I recall once, perhaps 15 years ago, when a collegue at work did something that I was *extremely* annoyed at, and I spent about 5 minutes explaining in precise detail what was wrong with his actions. This was witnessed by a lady who was somewhat younger (30's), who definitely deferred to both of us as "older men". Her eyes just about popped out of her head at the whole thing, because she had never seen me even come close to giving anyone a dressing down before. Her most poignant observation? "When you're mad, you *don't* cuss at all!" I chuckled and agreed that she would now forever more know how to figure out when I was putting someone on, or really serious. If I'm cussing, you're safe, it's all in fun. No swearing... you'd best listen real careful, your life is in danger! :-) But, that is impossible to reproduce with written language. It also helps that I live in Alaska, where the women cuss more than the men anyway. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#795
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?
OFF TOPIC
On Dec 8, 11:13 pm, AndrewR wrote: useless idiots ****ingly stupid ****ingly useless troll ****ingly useless The ****ingly useless trolls totally ****ing useless wastes of flesh .....(grin - you can almost see the spittle flying onto his screen..!) Hey, 'AndrewR', I'm curious - is your vocabulary limitation genetic, learned, from brain injury, or drug-induced? Anyway, 1024x768 is good enough for Mr Magoo, and now he has shown his ability to express himself. An artiste extraordinaire! Oh if only we were worthy of seeing his body of work. But under which name? (O; |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital? | Bill Tuthill | Digital Photography | 1067 | December 29th 07 02:46 AM |
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital? | Helmsman3 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 790 | December 26th 07 05:40 PM |
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital? | Helmsman3 | Digital ZLR Cameras | 640 | December 26th 07 05:40 PM |
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital? | Helmsman3 | Digital ZLR Cameras | 22 | November 17th 07 08:45 PM |
[IMG] "REPLAY" - Minolta 100mm f/2 with Sony Alpha DSLR | Jens Mander | Digital Photography | 0 | August 13th 06 11:06 PM |