I must admit to not being entirely sure if such an announcement as this is welcome in the group - but it does deal with a 10+ year old programmable computer (yes, handheld calculator, but it's STILL a computer).
To support my collection (of Russian calculators/computers), I'm selling a few spares - in this case, a programmable MK-52 calculator from Russia. A great machine to play with, with lots of interesting quirks. Please visit the eBay listing at...
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=133853540
There's a couple of photos there.
If this message is NOT appropriate to the group, somebody drop me a line telling me why, and I'll be happy to refrain in future (if it's a valid reason :)))
Cheers
A
>> Now compare that with the 330 lines per mm you get from a typical
>> apo-lanthar or apo-tessar as were made back in the '30's . . .
>
> Indeed. As several of us commented last night, a reasonable 35mm SLR will
> give you 100 lines per mm. Medium format (or large format) will do a lot
> better, of course.
Of course? I don't understand the "of course". I see no fundamental reason why
a larger format will give you a greater resolution _per mm_. In fact, I would
think that the wider viewing angle for the same focal length would mean that you
might get less resolution.
The big advantage as I see it of larger formats is that for the same resolution
per mm you get much more detail in the frame!
I use medium format - I got a Yashica TLR (Rollei clone) for 6 pounds at a
charity auction a few years ago, and it got me hooked on it. Recently I damaged
my Yashica, so I've just bought a Hasselblad (a good set of accessories is
looking rather pricey, though). I'd love to find an 16384*16384 or similar
digital back at an affordable price! Heck, if I saw a 4096 * 4096 digital back
for my 'Blad below 500 pounds I'd probably buy it, even though that's only 36
lines per mm!
>> I guess most people are used to the unsharp pictures that come from the
>> average point-n-shoot, with film processed by one of the 'photos back in
>> an hour' places. Digial cameras might well produce results similar to
>> those. But that doesn't mean you can't do a lot better with film (or
>> indeed with a digital camera given a decent CCD (=$$$$$$$$$$))
I think there are two independent viewpoints here. If you are taking pictures
for display on people's computer monitors (e.g. on web sites) you don't need
more than a few lines per mm, since the monitor itself will probably only
display 3 or 4 pixels per mm (say 2 lines). A 640 * 480 pixel picture is the
largest that will display on many people's screens. For this purpose a digital
camera of say 1280 * 1024 is probably perfectly adequate.
If you're taking pictures to blow up to a foot or two across and print on high
quality paper, then most digital cameras are quite inadequate, and a large or
medium format or really good 35mm film camera is required.
>> >If you have a 100mm wide print (normal sort of size) and 640 pixels,
>> >that's only 3 or 6 lpm (depending on whether you think a line is 1 pixel
>> >or 2). That's not a poor resolution, it's a non-existant resolution!
>> >
>> >Ouch!. Now I know why I can't stand those digital cameras.
Tony, when you talk about 640 pixels across a 4 inch print being only 6 pixels /
3 lines per mm, you've just stopped looking at film resolution and started
looking at print resolution. Don't forget that the standard 35mm negative is
generally considered blowable up to as much as 12*8 inches, so 100 lines per mm
at the film becomes 12 lines per mm at the print; 3 lines per mm at the print
corresponds to 25 per mm at the film. So it is poor resolution, but not the
"nonexistent" resolution you were talking about.
On the subject of lines per mm, what is the resolution of a typical ccd per mm
_at the surface of the chip_?
Philip.
PS why do people so often talk about blowing 35mm up to 10*8 or 12*10 as the
limit? Is it simply standard paper sizes? It's certainly not the aspect ratio
of the negative.
A repost for those who didn't see it the first time. I'm only posting it
once a week. -Ron
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Looking to clear some shelf space and don't like ebay so in classic
fashion I'm running my own. Take a look. Highlights include:
TI-99/4 (not 4A!)
TS-2068
TS-1000
Kaypro 10
Kaypro 4 -- no bid yet!!
Kaypro 2
Kaypro II
TRS-80 Coco 1
TRS-80 pocket computer PC-2
Coleco ADAM
SWTPc S/09 System
all with various accessories and manuals. Also software and books,
including original muMATH/muSIMP for the Apple II.
http://net-24-42.dhcp.mcw.edu/auction/auction.html
is the URL. Shipping would be from Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Ron Kneusel
rkneusel(a)mcw.edu
I have a few bits and pieces here which I want rid of ASAP, I did have someone
interested in them some 8 months ago (noone on this list I hasten to add) but
since he let me down I'm posting them here.
List follows:
Wang keyboard.
Olivetti wide carriage daisywheel printer (from S100 based WP system)
Star NB-15 wide carriage 24-pin printer
Princeton Graphics EGA monitor (x2)
Nixdorf VDU
Televideo 950 VDU (x2)
Zenith Z89 VDU
The latter items would really only be good for spares, e.g. the Star Printer
needs a new printhead, the Z89 is missing the "video" board, the TV-950s won't
communicate with their keyboards, but it's all available for the
cost of coming to get it.
I'd rather not dump this stuff in a skip but that's where it's all headed and
soon if someone doesn't take it away. I'm located in Birmingham, email me
directly if interested.
TTFN - Pete.
--
Hardware & Software Engineer. Sound Engineer.
Collector of Arcade Machines, Games Consoles & Obsolete Computers (esp DEC)
peter.pachla(a)virgin.net |
peter.pachla(a)vectrex.freeserve.co.uk |
peter.pachla(a)wintermute.free-online.co.uk | www.wintermute.free-online.co.uk
--
Having recently gotten rid of my Sun 3 series workstations I'm left with the
monitor, it's a 20" RGB unit (made by Sony I think) and was previously attached
to my 3/60.
Anyone in the UK interested in this? I'd be interested in swapping it for
something I can use, like a colour VGA monitor (PLEASE!!!) or something
obsolete.... :-)
I'm located in Birmingham and due to the size of the thing I'm NOT shipping it,
so it's come and collect only.
TTFN - Pete.
--
Hardware & Software Engineer. Sound Engineer.
Collector of Arcade Machines, Games Consoles & Obsolete Computers (esp DEC)
peter.pachla(a)virgin.net |
peter.pachla(a)vectrex.freeserve.co.uk |
peter.pachla(a)wintermute.free-online.co.uk | www.wintermute.free-online.co.uk
--
I have little experience with Polaroid since the '60's when I occasonally
used a Polaroid back for my 4x5 (9x12 cm) Linhof. Since then I've only used
Polaroid for 'scope pictures.
However, what I do recall is that while they're OK for use as full-scale
snapshots, the film is too grainy for enlargement. I learned about this
when I used the negative film from Polaroid. I've concluded that the
quality of the photos from this technology is not as high as what's wanted
by users of digital photography in general, i.e. I doubt it's up to the
quality of the 640x480 resolution of the Sony cameras.
My interest in digital photography has been stimulated by the need to
integrate photographs into technical documents and correspondence. There's
plenty of software for rendering the color photos as what they are, up to
"glossy-paper-magazine" e.g. Time or Spiegel but once you start to enlarge
the image, the lack of resolution becomes a major factor. I've considered
other image processing approaches, e.g. scan-rate conversion software which
reduces a raster image to Fourier series in both directions, thereby
allowing you to "fit" the image to whatever resolution you like, though it
requires post-processing to straighten and sharpen edges, etc.
What really puzzles me is whether it can process and render a photo as black
and white line-art. Anyone have
experience with this?
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Hans Franke <Hans.Franke(a)mch20.sbs.de>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Wednesday, July 14, 1999 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: digital cameras
>> > c) using an ordinary camera and scanning the prints.
>> > Pro: - Cheapest solution (imidiate or in mid range if
>> > a scanner has to be purchased)
>> > - Resolution at least as good as with an customer range
>> > digital camera
>> > Con: - No short turn around cycle - you'll have to wait
>> > for the prints and scan them
>> > - most work (you'll have to scan them)
>
>> E) do as in D but use a polaroid camara for the prints.
>
>Good idea - I didn't think about Polaroid.
>Has anybody ever tried to scan a colcour Polaroid
>picture ? I suspect it might be problematic due
>the glosy film on top of the picture. (Sorry, I
>don't have a Polaroid camera).
>
>So e) would be like c), but the klick to file time
>is way shorter (almost as an digital camera), with
>a high quality resolution, but higher cost per picture
>on the long run.
>
>Thanks
>h.
>
>
>--
>Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
>Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
>Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
>Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
>HRK
Yes, I got a reply from Bill with his address. I'm just waiting on the
package to arrive. Once it does, I'll ship his parts off to him.
Thanks!
Jay West
-----Original Message-----
From: David Hoskins <davhos(a)magna.com.au>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Saturday, July 17, 1999 7:54 PM
Subject: Re: Paging Bill Yakowenko!
>Have you had any luck getting a response from Bill?
>
>His home page is http://www.cs.unc.edu/~yakowenk/
>previously I have been able to contact him at
>yakowenk(a)cs.unc.edu
>but my last message went unanswered. Maybe he is away on holiday or
>something.
>
>David
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jay West <jlwest(a)tseinc.com>
>To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
><classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
>Date: Tuesday, 13 July 1999 9:33
>Subject: Paging Bill Yakowenko!
>
>
>>Sorry to all on the list for this personal traffic; I don't have an email
>>address handy for Mr. Bill Yakowenko.
>>
>>Bill;
>>
>>I'm getting the eproms you wanted from overseas. Send me your mailing
>>address so I can forward them to you.
>>
>>Thanks!
>>
>>Jay West
>>
>
>
hi there
I have a Intel MDS (micro development system) Intellec 2 for sale. I
wondered if you anyone is interested. Please check out my web pages at
http://home.freeuk.com/joro/trade.htm
for a better description.
regards
John
_____________________________________________
Free email with personality! Over 200 domains!
http://www.MyOwnEmail.com
Is there a good reference around that explains the details of setting up
SMD devices, specifically Fujitsu Eagles? I know nothing about them.
And this Sun3/280 here has two Eagles. One of them has a bunch of
connectors on the back (a db25+db50? for command in, the same for command
out, and then a seperate db25 'data'). The other drive (that I thought
was identical) lacks all those connectors, but has a rainbow-colored
ribbon cable coming out from underneith the back plate that splits into
two parts, one that larger db50? connector and another db25 (with a box
that is plainly labelled rs232 gender changer). This has all vastly
confused me.
I was able to boot SunOS 4.2 off the Eagle with the connectors partially.
However, the second eagle is listed in the fstab and it tries to check
them, failing miserably, and dumping me to a prompt. However, aparently
there's something else going extremely wrong as well since I can't type
anything at that # prompt (using a type 4 keyboard with a homemade adapter
to the Sun3 connector, the prom (v2.6 i think) detects it just fine as a
type 4 keyboard -- does SunOS 4.2 not support type 4 keyboards?) I know
its still running however because its still puts out an 'ie0: carrier
lost' message every few moments. Btw, I'm using a 501-1116(?) video card
in slot three, and it seems to work just fine -- I don't have a monitor
capable of using the onboard mono video.
Lets see, what else can I complain about. Oh, how much power do those
Eagles use? I've been plugging them directly into the wall (bypassing the
/280 rack's distribution panel, which uses a big (30amp?) plug that I
defintly don't have anything to plug into). Do any special considerations
need to be taken here?
mid
PS: Anyone know where to get boot images for an NCD 17in xterm? Or know
how to troubleshoot an HP Apollo 425t that won't come up to a boot monitor
(even serial)? Maybe a reference to what all those status lights mean
would help.
---
Adam Fritzler
{ mid(a)auk.cx, afritz(a)iname.com}
http://www.auk.cx/~mid/
"Behold the power of cheese." -- National Dairy Council
