Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
$860 Today - Thrilled With My 3.3 mp Camera Purchase
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Sep 29, 2022 12:27:57   #
rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
 
dpullum wrote:
In 1960 I did not know beans about sensor size or type. The DC 4800 had a 1/1.8" CCD sensor just a bit bigger than small sensor cameras used now. John Q. Public looks at camera physical size, pixels, what their friend have, ad hype and cost... sensor size... what's that? is what they would ask. Now they only know iPhone ... Rehess, what is the sensor size in your phone... would you know without looking it up? Too often UHH people mistakenly go for the higher price cameras, and filters etc. without searching for reviews and specifications.

Shame that Kodak Management refused to see the obvious future in digital cameras... Shame GM did not see the future in EV-1 in 1996. Kodak said "We make film." and GM said "We make ICE gasoline cars."
In 1960 I did not know beans about sensor size or ... (show quote)

My Pentax Q-7 - the camera which I use most - has a 1/1.7” sensor. I know that without looking it up.

Kodak did become a film company, because they decided that they couldn’t compete with the wages paid in Asia.

Reply
Sep 29, 2022 13:25:58   #
Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC
 
rehess wrote:
People tend to look at size of the sensor in inches and cost in dollars, not size in MP


I was refering to what Bridges wrote:

Reply
Sep 29, 2022 14:08:26   #
Pepsiman Loc: New York City
 
Hmmm. I think it's time to take out my Kodak Z981 and play with it...

Reply
 
 
Sep 29, 2022 14:58:30   #
dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida
 
Bridges wrote:
I don't know how much crop you applied to this photo, but if a straight shot, the latest phone cameras do a better job!

There was no crop the image was SOOC ... keep in mind that this was taken with a 1961 state-of-the-art early digital camera which gave a record 3.1 mp image. Yes, today's cell phones are magic, I agree with you.

The face only comparison is of course a crop so as to accent the change between the SOOC and the deNoised and Sharpened image. The Gigapixel image was huge and will of course make a good print

The Gigapixel x 6 not cropped image according to the calculator will produce a 43" x 33" image. Quite a feat for a starting 3.3 mp 1961 photograph. AI programs are magic and will bring to life old photos and old cameras... will it be in the minds of camera manufactures, regardless it is a game changer.
https://www.printsgicleeshop.com/pixels-to-print-size-calculator/

To give a 20" x 30" full resolution print only 9000x6000 pixels are needed. Hard to believe!!! AI treated 1961 image.
https://prophotosupply.com/blogs/resources/how-large-can-i-print-my-digital-image

Reply
Sep 29, 2022 15:05:24   #
bdk Loc: Sanibel Fl.
 
I bought my first digital camera used for $100.00 I was so excited to never have to have film developed again.I dont remember what it was, an ugly square box. I just know I loved having it. then on a cross country tour, the very first day. I dropped it on a concrete floor and that was it....

Reply
Sep 29, 2022 15:10:11   #
joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA
 
dpullum wrote:
Yes Bultaco in 1960 the most advanced digital was 3.1mp by Kodak... their expensive!! DC-4800. They were selling like Sweeney Tod's meat pies.

Can the old images from 1960s be saved by modern software? I think yes. Below is a side by side of the SOOC image and the same image cleaned and sharpened by Topaz deNoise AI and Sharpen AI.

Crop to face SOOC, 0.283 Mb vs Clean & Sharpened by AI, 2.1 Mb. Gigapixel gave 5.3 Mb


Love the results 🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗

Reply
Sep 29, 2022 15:14:49   #
joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA
 
dpullum wrote:
The Kodak DC-4800 3.1 mp photo gave a good 8x10 in its day. So the question is, can the 3.1 mp be made new and strong with modern [TOPAZ AI] software?

Using my using deNoise AI, Sharpening AI, and Gigapixel AI generated these from the original image. My error sharpening too much resulting in a harsh chin black line.

Face-recognition was turned on in Gigapixel. I am not experienced at these new AI programs especially the Gigapixel... Gigapixel has many choices under File>Preferences as well as the sliders.

With the new AI processing is the Pixel War coming to a close?

If any of you have the new Topaz Photo-AI that combines all three AI plugin please process and show us. In fact any work on the original or modified is welcome and feel free to upload. Resurrection of the old is new in an AI world.
The Kodak DC-4800 3.1 mp photo gave a good 8x10 in... (show quote)


A beautiful portrait - and results to match 🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈

Reply
 
 
Sep 29, 2022 17:22:51   #
revhen Loc: By the beautiful Hudson
 
Well, one of my favorite pictures was taken in October 2003 with my glorious Olympus pocket digital with all of 2mp that cost nowhere near $500.



Reply
Sep 29, 2022 19:08:56   #
dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida
 
revhen wrote:
Well, one of my favorite pictures was taken in October 2003 with my glorious Olympus pocket digital with all of 2mp that cost nowhere near $500.
Thank you for sharing

Rather amazing what the sensors did when not cut to small bits. Further amazing if you AI treated your beautiful photo. With AI treatments we can reconsider how many pixels we need a camera to have and still provide a good basis for AI modification to equal the modern expensive hi megapixel cameras. In fact to have a great created photo you only need imagination and one of the verbal text to photo programs.

AI is a whole new world in more than photography.

Reply
Sep 29, 2022 19:26:03   #
Harry13
 
dpullum wrote:
In 1960 I did not know beans about sensor size or type.

,
Me neither! I started with film in the early '50s. I think with a Voightlander, bought through the PX in Korea where I was serving in the field artillery. After a while I switched to Nikon.
Didn't go digital for many years but certainly it was after law school graduation in '62. Sill shooting my first digital, a Canon 5Dc. I'm 91, can't remember when I bought it but it but it d^mn sure wasn't "state of the art" by then. Harry

Reply
Sep 29, 2022 22:58:00   #
jack schade Loc: La Pine Oregon
 
I sure was state of the art.

Jack

Reply
 
 
Sep 30, 2022 00:18:41   #
Harry13
 
jack schade wrote:
It sure was state of the art.

Jack


I guess what I meant was that there were higher MP cameras around by the time I bought it. Since I print mostly 8x10s, I figured it was good enough. I've never been disappointed with it, I must say. Harry

Reply
Sep 30, 2022 05:35:47   #
Capn_Dave
 
I guess size does matter after all

Reply
Sep 30, 2022 07:47:46   #
dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida
 
Harry13 wrote:
I guess what I meant was that there were higher MP cameras around by the time I bought it. Since I print mostly 8x10s, I figured it was good enough. I've never been disappointed with it, I must say. Harry


I too print mostly 8x10 or about that size. My left over floor laminate trimmed provides a great backing for galley wrapping prints modified with On-1** resize wrap subprogram. The On-1 mirror images the wrap portion so no image is lost. I use 3/4 blocks to make the stand out from the wall for added effect. [there are wrap tutorials for On-1 resize, my program is a 2018 edition]
One wall of 8x10s can display to you ... gee, I did some great stuff... For big ego prints 24x36"... how many can you hang on a typical home wall? Few.

Reply
Sep 30, 2022 12:13:15   #
Harry13
 
"For big ego prints 24x36"... how many can you hang on a typical home wall? Few."

I have one. A color pic of a small Pacific coast beach, bluffs and ocean with one small figure in a blue coat on the beach. Figure is really dwarfed by the bluffs and the ocean. Beach too for that matter! Best pic I ever took imho. Taken many years ago with a Nikon film camera. Harry

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.