In article <slrnhfb6lm.3lg.not...@myvai2.notbob.com>,
notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote: > On 2009-11-07, Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
> > One technique, if by "shrink" you mean to reduce the number of pixels, > > is to do it before you take the pictures.
> You lost me on this one, Dan. How do you "reduce the number of > pixels"?
"Shrink" is a little ambiguous. To me, that means reduce the file size. I have a 10mp camera. That was the cheapest camera Costco sold last spring, when my last camera died:
That's *way* too many pixels to fit on a normal screen. If I'm going to put a snapshot on Tinypic or send it as an Email attachment, I don't need that much detail, and it is too slow to download. My camera has a number of settings to reduce the number of pixels saved. "PC", or 1024, seems like a good setting for a snapshot. I assume that means 1024 pixels in the long direction. It has six other settings. Some people just choose max resolution and cut it down when they transfer to their computer. With the old memory cards, they got filled up pretty fast. With the new ones, they don't.
Turns out Om has a different definition of "shrink".
-- Dan Abel Petaluma, California USA da...@sonic.net
<rjynly...@comcast.net> wrote: >I'm just as surprised. This is from my township's website:
>Due to legislative mandates and improved manufacturing techniques, most >common household batteries have little or no toxic content anymore and >recycling them is no longer necessary. Therefore, it's OK to throw your old >batteries out with the trash.
That's good to know!
>(me again) Rechargeables still need to be recycled.
Darn. I have one on the counter that I was hoping could go into the trash. Do you think those eco friendly rechargeable in another thread can go in the trash?
-- I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
In article <ln6bf5dv5jl5kkke8ecemrqgfe4a6o3...@4ax.com>, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:09:37 -0800, isw <i...@witzend.com> wrote:
> >I recently got some Eneloop (silly name) cells. I like the fact that > >they hold almost a full charge for nearly a year. Previously, I thought > >my camera was draining the batteries; turns out they were draining > >themselves.
> Great! How many charges do you get out of them? The usual 100 would > mean you could include them in your will. :)
> Where did you buy them - in a photo shop or over the internet?
Costco. They've been in stock there the last couple of years.
They claim 1000 charges.
-- Dan Abel Petaluma, California USA da...@sonic.net
--> -->> In article <isw-0A19AD.20491105112009@[216.168.3.50]>, -->> isw <i...@witzend.com> wrote: -->> -->> > In article <ompomelet-FB17A4.08493505112...@news-wc.giganews.com>, -->> > Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote: -->> > -->> > > In article <2cx4yoco89s7$....@sqwertz.com>, -->> > > Sqwertz <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote: -->> > > -->> > > > On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 06:40:28 -0600, Omelet wrote: -->> > > > -->> > > > > And my computer evidently is not going to acknowledge the device -->> > > > > without -->> > > > > the software. I know as I tried. -->> > > > -->> > > > All cameras have a mode that allow them to act just like a flash -->> > > > drive. Just plug it into a USB post and there are your -->> > > > files/pictures. -->> > > -->> > > Tried that. Didn't work babe, but thanks. My old Fuji did just that. -->> > > -->> > > > -->> > > > If a camera doesn't have this feature, don't buy it. You should not -->> > > > have to install bulky, awkward, and mostly useless software on every -->> > > > computer to which you'd like to download pictures. Irfanview (free -->> > > > and lightweight) is all you really need (if that). -->> > > > -->> > > > -sw -->> > > -->> > > Is there an infraview for Mac? I've heard good things about that -->> > > program. -->> > -->> > Don't need it. Preview does most of what it does, and iPhoto probably -->> > does the rest, plus a lot more. Both of those come as "part of the kit". -->> > -->> > Isaac -->> -->> Yes, they did. Preview is the default, but then I run all pics thru -->> photoshop for resizing, color adjustment and FRAMING. :-) I have -->> Photoshop CS. -->> -->> I never have played with iPhoto. --> -->Take a look. It can do all the things you mention. --> -->Isaac
On 2009-11-07, Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Take the pic at a lower MP setting. > I learned NOT to do that tho' to get better quality pics for posting.
??????
Your camera ....which you've still still not identified.... has a megapixel setting, which you can choose how many pixels the camera's sensor will actually utilize?
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:07:11 GMT, notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote: >On 2009-11-07, Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Take the pic at a lower MP setting. >> I learned NOT to do that tho' to get better quality pics for posting.
>??????
>Your camera ....which you've still still not identified.... has a megapixel >setting, which you can choose how many pixels the camera's sensor will >actually utilize?
It was stated in her OP.
`````````
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 06:40:28 -0600, Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Chose it, bought it, (Nikon Coolpix L19)
-- I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 09:47:18 -0800, Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote: >Costco. They've been in stock there the last couple of years.
Shoot. I bought new rechargeables just a couple of months ago at my local camera shop but "eco-friendly" and "holds the charge for a year" never came up in conversation. Guess they didn't stock that type.
>They claim 1000 charges.
At one year each? That's money well spent!
-- I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
sf wrote: > On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 11:49:20 -0500, "Nancy Young" >> (me again) Rechargeables still need to be recycled.
> Darn. I have one on the counter that I was hoping could go into the > trash. Do you think those eco friendly rechargeable in another thread > can go in the trash?
I don't know. All they say is rechargeables and those button batteries like hearing aid, watch, etc. still need to be recycled.
In article <slrnhfbdqe.3lg.not...@myvai2.notbob.com>,
notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote: > On 2009-11-07, Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Take the pic at a lower MP setting. > > I learned NOT to do that tho' to get better quality pics for posting.
> ??????
> Your camera ....which you've still still not identified.... has a megapixel > setting, which you can choose how many pixels the camera's sensor will > actually utilize?
From the very first post in this thread:
Nikon Coolpix L19
That was on Thursday.
Every recent (in the last few years) digital camera I've seen, which isn't many, has a menu setting for picture quality. My camera has seven. My understanding is that it controls how much picture information is saved when you take a picture.
-- Dan Abel Petaluma, California USA da...@sonic.net
Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote: > In article > <dabel-E25F92.07362007112...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>, > Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
> > In article <ompomelet-5CE1AC.00493307112...@news-wc.giganews.com>, > > Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Ok. I have a fresh batch of pics to shrink!
> > One technique, if by "shrink" you mean to reduce the number of pixels, > > is to do it before you take the pictures.
> But they are still too large, and you lose detail.
> Trust me, this works better! I've tried it the other way.
How big is your computer screen (inches and pixels)?
-- Dan Abel Petaluma, California USA da...@sonic.net
In article <76ebf5drkooetlttiiirumg72dbmu73...@4ax.com>, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 09:47:18 -0800, Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >Costco. They've been in stock there the last couple of years.
> Shoot. I bought new rechargeables just a couple of months ago at my > local camera shop but "eco-friendly" and "holds the charge for a year" > never came up in conversation. Guess they didn't stock that type.
> >They claim 1000 charges.
> At one year each? That's money well spent!
One year is if you don't use them. If you use them, then they run down just like regular batteries.
-- Dan Abel Petaluma, California USA da...@sonic.net
In article <slrnhfbdqe.3lg.not...@myvai2.notbob.com>,
notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote: > On 2009-11-07, Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Take the pic at a lower MP setting. > > I learned NOT to do that tho' to get better quality pics for posting.
> ??????
> Your camera ....which you've still still not identified....
Yes I have. Several times. ;-) Nikon Coolpix L19.
> has a megapixel > setting, which you can choose how many pixels the camera's sensor will > actually utilize?
> nb
Yes it does. It goes up to 8 megapixels. I have it set at 5 megapixels.
You can get MUCH more detailed pics using a higher MP setting, then I shrink them using photoshop using the size rather than pixel choice. I retain more detail.
Plus, if I want a cheat "closeup" of a spot in the pic, I can crop the portion I want to enlarge, increase it's size, without losing good detail. I do that all the time. :-)
Photoshop is a wondrous tool.
Yes, it takes me more time to process my pics by doing it this way but I keep all the originals in case I want to play with them more.
You can always remove detail/clarity, but you can never put data in there that was not there to begin with. With an 8 gig memory card, I have room to play. <g>
It's for those that take photography seriously... and may want to do prints later on (like when I take pictures of family members!) -- Peace! Om
"Human nature seems to be to control other people until they put their foot down." --Steve Rothstein
> In article <slrnhfbdqe.3lg.not...@myvai2.notbob.com>, > notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote:
> > On 2009-11-07, Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Take the pic at a lower MP setting. > > > I learned NOT to do that tho' to get better quality pics for posting.
> > ??????
> > Your camera ....which you've still still not identified.... has a megapixel > > setting, which you can choose how many pixels the camera's sensor will > > actually utilize?
> From the very first post in this thread:
> Nikon Coolpix L19
> That was on Thursday.
Thanks. <g>
> Every recent (in the last few years) digital camera I've seen, which > isn't many, has a menu setting for picture quality. My camera has > seven. My understanding is that it controls how much picture > information is saved when you take a picture.
Yep! And the more you keep, the better the pics. I hate grainy pictures. I love fine detail, but I'm that way. -- Peace! Om
"Human nature seems to be to control other people until they put their foot down." --Steve Rothstein
> > > > Ok. I have a fresh batch of pics to shrink!
> > > One technique, if by "shrink" you mean to reduce the number of pixels, > > > is to do it before you take the pictures.
> > But they are still too large, and you lose detail.
> > Trust me, this works better! I've tried it the other way.
> How big is your computer screen (inches and pixels)?
Hm, lets see: Right now it's set at 1024 x 768. Screen size? Flatscreen, 18".
Big enough. :-) I have a photoshop setting for viewing that says "fit on screen", then I can tell it to put the pic at 100% for adjusting. I generally adjust the width (or length) of the pic to 12" before I do my editing and that's the final posting size.
I truly do lose less detail that way. -- Peace! Om
"Human nature seems to be to control other people until they put their foot down." --Steve Rothstein
In article <ln6bf5dv5jl5kkke8ecemrqgfe4a6o3...@4ax.com>, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:09:37 -0800, isw <i...@witzend.com> wrote:
> >I recently got some Eneloop (silly name) cells. I like the fact that > >they hold almost a full charge for nearly a year. Previously, I thought > >my camera was draining the batteries; turns out they were draining > >themselves.
> Great! How many charges do you get out of them?
I don't recall, but probably similar to other NiMH cells.
> The usual 100 would mean you could include them in your will. :)
True, but what most interested me was the very low self-discharge. Previously, I had to change the camera cells about once every three weeks or so. The Eneloops came already charged. I installed them in July and finally had to change them in Late October, with lots of pictures in between.
> Where did you buy them - in a photo shop or over the internet?
eBay. I read about them, but couldn't find a local dealer (which is odd because I live in Silicon Valley).
The Eneloops don't have as large a current rating as others you can find (around 2000 vs. 2600 mA-Hr), but for camera use, what's important (at least to me) is that the batteries don't run down while the camera is just sitting around.
In article <76ebf5drkooetlttiiirumg72dbmu73...@4ax.com>, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 09:47:18 -0800, Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >Costco. They've been in stock there the last couple of years.
> Shoot. I bought new rechargeables just a couple of months ago at my > local camera shop but "eco-friendly" and "holds the charge for a year" > never came up in conversation. Guess they didn't stock that type.
> >They claim 1000 charges.
> At one year each? That's money well spent!
Note that the one year number is how long they'll stay charged *if you don't use them*.
In article <JejJm.59576$cj4.13...@newsfe14.ams2>, "Nancy Young" <rjynly...@comcast.net> wrote:
> sf wrote: > > On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 11:49:20 -0500, "Nancy Young"
> >> (me again) Rechargeables still need to be recycled.
> > Darn. I have one on the counter that I was hoping could go into the > > trash. Do you think those eco friendly rechargeable in another thread > > can go in the trash?
> I don't know. All they say is rechargeables and those button > batteries like hearing aid, watch, etc. still need to be recycled.
> > On 2009-11-07, Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Take the pic at a lower MP setting. > > > I learned NOT to do that tho' to get better quality pics for posting.
> > ??????
> > Your camera ....which you've still still not identified....
> Yes I have. Several times. ;-) Nikon Coolpix L19.
> > has a megapixel > > setting, which you can choose how many pixels the camera's sensor will > > actually utilize?
> > nb
> Yes it does. It goes up to 8 megapixels. I have it set at 5 megapixels.
> You can get MUCH more detailed pics using a higher MP setting, then I > shrink them using photoshop using the size rather than pixel choice. I > retain more detail.
> Plus, if I want a cheat "closeup" of a spot in the pic, I can crop the > portion I want to enlarge, increase it's size, without losing good > detail. I do that all the time. :-)
> Photoshop is a wondrous tool.
> Yes, it takes me more time to process my pics by doing it this way but I > keep all the originals in case I want to play with them more.
> You can always remove detail/clarity, but you can never put data in > there that was not there to begin with. With an 8 gig memory card, I > have room to play. <g>
> It's for those that take photography seriously... and may want to do > prints later on (like when I take pictures of family members!)
You are absolutely correct. Take images at the highest resolution you can, and never throw any of it away until you need to, and then always do that on a copy.
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:42:33 -0800, Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote: >One year is if you don't use them. If you use them, then they run down >just like regular batteries.
Huh. That's not fair! I have a one hour recharger, so I want batteries that will recharge in an hour (or less) and keep their charge longer than usual. A year sounded great to me, but of course I didn't think about the energy that would deplete batteries if they were used.
-- I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 19:58:50 -0800, isw <i...@witzend.com> wrote: >In article <ln6bf5dv5jl5kkke8ecemrqgfe4a6o3...@4ax.com>, > sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:09:37 -0800, isw <i...@witzend.com> wrote:
>> >I recently got some Eneloop (silly name) cells. I like the fact that >> >they hold almost a full charge for nearly a year. Previously, I thought >> >my camera was draining the batteries; turns out they were draining >> >themselves.
>> Great! How many charges do you get out of them?
>I don't recall, but probably similar to other NiMH cells.
>> The usual 100 would mean you could include them in your will. :)
>True, but what most interested me was the very low self-discharge. >Previously, I had to change the camera cells about once every three >weeks or so. The Eneloops came already charged. I installed them in July >and finally had to change them in Late October, with lots of pictures in >between.
I like those odds even if they don't really outlast me.
>> Where did you buy them - in a photo shop or over the internet?
>eBay. I read about them, but couldn't find a local dealer (which is odd >because I live in Silicon Valley).
>The Eneloops don't have as large a current rating as others you can find >(around 2000 vs. 2600 mA-Hr), but for camera use, what's important (at >least to me) is that the batteries don't run down while the camera is >just sitting around.
I pledge to stay focused and be open when a sales mentions eco batteries. Sounds good. Really!
-- I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:57:13 -0600, Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Yes it does. It goes up to 8 megapixels. I have it set at 5 megapixels.
I don't have a clue what mine is set at (factory settings). I dinked around with it when I first got it and changed some minor settings, but put everything back to factory when I was on vacation. I need to get the online manual and fiddle around with it again, because I have no idea what most of the settings mean. I can read the words, I just don't know what they mean. That makes me illiterate in both computer and camera languages.
-- I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
In article <o6pdf513ofto20b7mj4kqu2t1d95m88...@4ax.com>, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:57:13 -0600, Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> >Yes it does. It goes up to 8 megapixels. I have it set at 5 megapixels.
> I don't have a clue what mine is set at (factory settings). I dinked > around with it when I first got it and changed some minor settings, > but put everything back to factory when I was on vacation. I need to > get the online manual and fiddle around with it again, because I have > no idea what most of the settings mean. I can read the words, I just > don't know what they mean. That makes me illiterate in both computer > and camera languages.
I know what you mean. <g> I just don't see a need for _me_ to record with the full 8mp at this point, but I may play with it later. :-)
This camera is pretty intuitive. I only had to read the manual for a couple of things, one of them being flash control. Turns out I was overlooking a button so had not played with it yet! -- Peace! Om
"Human nature seems to be to control other people until they put their foot down." --Steve Rothstein
|
