Re: Digital camera pix

["Gomez ADDams" <gomez-at-netherworld-dot-com> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)]

on that fateful day 7/28/00 4:37 PM, Tesla list uttered:

> Original poster: "Lau, Gary" <Gary.Lau-at-compaq-dot-com>
> I've noticed that arc pictures show the so-called banjo effect much more
> pronounced than do film-based pictures I've taken.  Does anyone know if this
> is simply a result of the better focus and resolution,

#1, film has better resolution than digital imager chips, and will for the
forseeable future.  Even grainy fast film has more tiny bits of silver per
inch than any imaging chip could hope to have addressable bits.

#2, what makes you think the focus is better in a digital camera than in a
film camera?  As a hobby photographer, I get the impression that most
digital cameras have lower quality lenses than most film cameras, until you
spend about $3000.  However, the effective shutter speed in a digital camera
could potentially be much higher than that available in a film camera, so if
you usually have shaky hands, don't use a tripod, etc, etc with a film
camera, you may be used to seeing motion blur.

> or does the image
> sensor not truly integrate continuously over the exposure interval, instead
> taking discrete samples in time and adding them?

 That sounds more likely, although I do not know how the chips in digital
cameras are scanned- progressively or multiple times.

- Bill Lemieux

......................................
It it weird in here, or is it just me?