So 800 lines per mm is 800,000 lines per meter. That's a line width of 1250 nm correct? The far end of visible red light has a wavelength of 700 to 750 nm (nm = nano meter.) So this is beginning to get close to the limits of resolution, just as the wavelength of light is the limit of resolution for optical microscopes.
Is this correct or am I missing something?
Okay these are cameras and bodies I currently own: Nikon - F4, EM, FG20, N70, D40X, D3000, Canon - EOS-650, EF (two of them), Olympus E-620, Graflex Crown Graphic 2X3, Zanza Bronica - C2, S2, and Argus C3. I'm not getting into lens.
And while not a camera: Canon CanoScan 9000F
Yeah, the frame speed is 1/60 of a second or there about. You can't go with a higher shutter speed and improve on the "stop motion" aspect of that video presentation; it is what it is. And as was pointed out above if you freeze a single frame of the video on your DVR there may be blurred motion present.
Most broadcast events carry a disclaimer that goes something like "The following broadcast is intended for the private use of our viewing audience." As long as he is using it for his own viewing pleasure I would think it's the same as recording it on his DVR.
It depends on what TV set you have and whether your watching a standard definition or a high definition video feed. Most TVs have either a 60Hz, a 120Hz or a 240Hz refresh rate if I'm not mistaken. So, that being the case I'd start with a shutter speed of 1/60 and see how that works.
blacks2 wrote:
Yes the company that made the camera was Graflex, however the camera is not. It's like calling a Lincoln car a Ford since it was Ford who made it
No, its more like calling an Impala a Chevrolet and since I could not tell if it was a Crown Graphic or a Speed Graphic from the shot it seems to me calling it a Graflex is perfectly permissible. What it is not is a reflex camera.
blacks2 wrote:
I have to correct you both, it's not a Graflex, it is a Graphic. The Graflex is a reflex camera
No, Graflex is the name of the company. I'm sitting here looking at mine which has Graflex at the top of the camera case, Grown Graphic on the lens board and Graphex on the lens.
blacks2 wrote:
Thank you. Argus C3? OMG, if I would have bought all the C3's I saw I could built a wall with them. It's about the easiest camera to locate.
That's because they were built like tanks (or bricks, if you prefer), and in large numbers also.
I have one with the 35mm, the 50mm, and the 100mm lenses. And yes, changing lenses is a bit of a process.
I guess I'm a little confused here.
In windows you should be able to hook up a card reader with card installed on a USB port and have the OS treat this like a mass storage device. You should then be able to use Windows Explorer to drag and drop or copy/paste the jpg files without ever having to open the Canon program or Image Browser.
I'm glad to hear that so many of you guys are helping to preserve the photographic past.
Does anyone out there own an Argus C3, or two?
MikWar wrote:
They appear to be wisps of clouds in front of the center cloud. Looking at the download you can see some of the "cuts" extend beyond the center cloud. There also also darker wisps elsewhere in the pic.
Exactly correct.
Being on the ground, and with the earth's curve, you are seeing/photographing the cloud structures at an angle. This makes clouds closer to you appear to be at the same height as higher clouds that are further away.
neilds37 wrote:
Yes.
Edit: After reading the comments below the article it seems the article is about the first Mosquito restored by the facility. The one in my photos is the second one, restored for Paul Allen.
Mr. Allen seems to be very active in preserving history. And I say good for him. This link is to another of his accomplishments regarding WWII history.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/19/us/uss-indianapolis-wreckage-found/index.html
Very nice series. What camera/settings?
I wonder is this is the Mosquito in the photos?
http://www.warbirdsnews.com/warbirds-news/worlds-flying-mosquito-flew-today.html