6 Jun
1997
6 Jun
'97
7:54 a.m.
At 08:53 AM 6/6/97 -0700, you wrote:
One of the things on my wish list is a digital camera
so I can easily
digitize photos of stuff like this.
I have been trying to decide the best way to get images into digital form.
Naturally, a digital camera is one way, but not the only. There's also the
photo/scanner method, camcorder/video capture, and probably others. As I
see it, the pros/cons are:
DigCam: + Easy to use, convenient
- Expensive to buy, somewhat limited capacity,
no hard copy of images (except printer output)
Photo/Scanner: + Hard Copy, can be used for other stuff too
- Film and Developing can be expensive, takes time
Camcorder: + Easy to use, Allows for selecting the right image
from several views
- Video capture hardware/software isn't cheap
So, does anyone have thoughts on which is best? I'd like a scanner for
other things, but they're expensive too. There's also the question of 35mm
vs. polaroid and type of scanner. (Not to mention where the heck would I
put it!) I've got a camcorder and my girlfriend's mac supposedly can do
video capture as is, but I've got to find software and figure it out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- O-
Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad
sinasohn(a)crl.com that none but madmen know."
Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates
San Francisco, California http://www.crl.com/~sinasohn/
6 Jun
6 Jun
8:23 a.m.
You might also consider getting your photos from a normal 35mm processed into
a photo CD. Most image processing software can read them right from your
PC/MAC cdrom. Costs extra, but nothing compared to a digital camera.
--
Jim Strickland
jim(a)calico.litterbox.com
--
"...It tells me that goose stepping morons like yourself should try reading
books instead of burning them."
-Dr. Henry Jones Sr.
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
10:03 a.m.
Uncle Roger <sinasohn(a)crl.com> writes
So, does anyone have thoughts on which is best?
I'd like a scanner for
other things, but they're expensive too. There's also the question of 35mm
vs. polaroid and type of scanner. (Not to mention where the heck would I
put it!) I've got a camcorder and my girlfriend's mac supposedly can do
video capture as is, but I've got to find software and figure it out.
What about taking photos with a normal camera and having them
put on a Photo CD? This is relatively cheap and the quality (up to
3000x2000 pixels) should be plenty!
--
Eifs
3:54 p.m.
In message <1.5.4.16.19970606100120.0937be2c(a)mail.crl.com> you wrote:
At 08:53 AM 6/6/97 -0700, you wrote:
Digital cameras are convenient but limited resolution. I would suggest
you look into the camcorder digitizer called Snappy - good value for
money and you can use your existing camcorder.
--
Lindsay Thachuk
in Western Canada with the World's Best Computer
- the Acorn RiscPC with the only StrongARM in ARMstrong
One of the things on my wish list is a digital
camera so I can easily
digitize photos of stuff like this.
I have been trying to decide the best way to get images into digital form.
Naturally, a digital camera is one way, but not the only. There's also the
photo/scanner method, camcorder/video capture, and probably others. As I
see it, the pros/cons are: 
9:03 p.m.
New subject: Seattle Computer CPU Module
In my travels, I picked up a dozen or so Seattle Computer CPU modules,
model 220A. Basically, it is a circuit board about 1.5" x 3" with an
8088, SN74LS04, SN74LS30, and a SN74LS273 chip on it. It has an 8 pin
header on the component side of the board, and the 40 pins of the 8088
socket extend about .5" below the board. Does anyone here have any idea
what this is??? I have had them for several years and have yet to find
out where they were used. Thanks.
7 Jun
7 Jun
2:09 p.m.
New subject: Seattle Computer CPU Module
I was hoping someone wlse would know, but I'll do my best.
In my travels, I picked up a dozen or so Seattle
Computer CPU modules,
model 220A. Basically, it is a circuit board about 1.5" x 3" with an
8088, SN74LS04, SN74LS30, and a SN74LS273 chip on it. It has an 8 pin
header on the component side of the board, and the 40 pins of the 8088
socket extend about .5" below the board. Does anyone here have any idea
what this is??? I have had them for several years and have yet to find
out where they were used. Thanks.
This info was obtained second hand from a guy I bought a bunch of
SCP stuff from. Apparently a one-time friend of his work for them.
Thus - this could be wrong. SCP made at least six models of computer
the first being Z80 machines which ran CP/M, the next few being 8086
based which ran CPM-86 or SCP-DOS (which I'm pretty sure is MS-DOS
1.0 or the immediate prdecessor purchased by MS). The last were 8088
PC-clone type machines. We're concerned with the 8086 machines which
apparently were equipped to take a coprocessor so as to run both
CP/M-86 and SCP-DOS/MS-DOS simultaneously. I missed buying such a
machine by 15 minutes :(. At any rate - I'm guessing you have a
bunch of 8088 co-processors for these machines. The one I missed
was called a Gazelle-I so they might be for that machine.
Too bad I missed the machine - but I did pick up everything else the
guy had. Came down to a stack of Shugart 8" drives, some CompuPro
S-100 boards and a whole bunch of SCP disks. Now that I've brought
it up - SCP-DOS 1.0 = MS-DOS 1.0? I'm pretty sure it is because
another disk I've got is labelled the same but says SCP/MS-DOS v1.25.
Bill
----------------------------------------------------
Bill Whitson - Classic Computers ListOp
bill(a)booster.u.washinton.edu or bcw(a)u.washington.edu
http://weber.u.washington.edu/~bcw
2:23 p.m.
New subject: Seattle Computer CPU Module
> In my travels, I picked up a dozen or so Seattle Computer CPU modules,
> model 220A. Basically, it is a circuit board about 1.5" x 3" with an
> 8088, SN74LS04, SN74LS30, and a SN74LS273 chip on it. It has an 8 pin
> header on the component side of the board, and the 40 pins of the 8088
> socket extend about .5" below the board. Does anyone here have any idea
> what this is??? I have had them for several years and have yet to find
> out where they were used. Thanks.
CP/M-86 and SCP-DOS/MS-DOS simultaneously. I missed
buying such a
machine by 15 minutes :(. At any rate - I'm guessing you have a
bunch of 8088 co-processors for these machines. The one I missed
was called a Gazelle-I so they might be for that machine.
Bill
That would make sense since they sure look like an add-on for
something. One thing I left out of the descriptions was the date code
on the chips were 1986. If anyone has a need for them, let me know as I
have about 2 dozen when I checked again.
5:45 p.m.
New subject: Seattle Computer CPU Module
On Sat, 7 Jun 1997, Bill Whitson wrote:
This info was obtained second hand from a guy I bought
a bunch of
SCP stuff from. Apparently a one-time friend of his work for them.
Thus - this could be wrong. SCP made at least six models of computer
the first being Z80 machines which ran CP/M, the next few being 8086
based which ran CPM-86 or SCP-DOS (which I'm pretty sure is MS-DOS
1.0 or the immediate prdecessor purchased by MS). The last were 8088
I never knew they called it SCP-DOS. All I ever heard it called was
"QDOS" -- Quick & Dirty Operating System, basically a crude CP/M clone.
--
Ward Griffiths
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within
the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." --Claire Wolfe
8 Jun
8 Jun
6:20 p.m.
At 08:53 AM 6/6/97 -0700, you wrote:
It seems to me that it would be fun if our pictures of classic hardware
were themselves produced by a classic machine. And yes, there were image
processing systems 10 - 15 years ago, some of which _occassionally_ turn
up second-hand.
I2S had a TV-rate ADC card for their image processing systems. It would
take the output from a monochrome video camera with a few mods, and let
you store images in the machine's RAM, and hence on disk. If you want
colour, either add another 2 cards, or use filters to take separate R,G,B
images with a monochrome camera (the subject is static, of course), and
combine them later.
Mind you, the cost of a 2nd-hand I2S processor + camera + interface
electronics would almost certainly exceed the cost of a QuickCam or
whatever.
There are also 'classic' CCD cameras. There was a thing made by
'Datacopy'
that had a linear CCD that was mechanically scanned across the frame
(motor + leadscrew). There was certainly a PERQ interface for this (made
by GHS/Audre' in Canada), and I guess others as well.
These solutions sound a lot more fun than a modern PC-based system.
--
-tony
ard12(a)eng.cam.ac.uk
The gates in my computer are AND,OR and NOT, not Bill
One of the things on my wish list is a digital
camera so I can easily
digitize photos of stuff like this.
I have been trying to decide the best way to get images into digital form.
Naturally, a digital camera is one way, but not the only. There's also the
photo/scanner method, camcorder/video capture, and probably others. As I
see it, the pros/cons are: 
2:06 p.m.
On Sun, 8 Jun 1997, A.R. Duell wrote:
These solutions sound a lot more fun than a modern
PC-based system.
If not completely outrageous and insane.
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
4:22 p.m.
On Sun, 8 Jun 1997, Sam Ismail wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jun 1997, A.R. Duell wrote:
Hey, they said we were insane when when we got involved with these
silicon-based lifeforms when they were new.
--
Ward Griffiths
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within
the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." --Claire Wolfe
These solutions sound a lot more fun than a
modern PC-based system.
If not completely outrageous and insane.
Sam
8:18 p.m.
On Sun, 8 Jun 1997, A.R. Duell wrote:
I hope you're suggesting that's a good reason _to_ use them :-)
If not, what's insane about a graphics display system that fills an entire
6' rack, contains over 3000 DRAM chips (and about as many TTL devices to
control everything), and has a service manual that contains the wonderful
statement 'Repair the instrument using normal techniques. The supplied set
of Engineering Drawings may be of help'. That is the entire section on
maintenance and repair!
These solutions sound a lot more fun than a
modern PC-based system.
If not completely outrageous and insane. Sam
--
-tony
ard12(a)eng.cam.ac.uk
The gates in my computer are AND,OR and NOT, not Bill
4:19 p.m.
On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, A.R. Duell wrote:
Hmmmm...come to think of it, you've got a point. Finding the time for
all this is an entirely different matter. By the time I got around to
scanning in all my photos using such a classic contraption, the P100
clone system I use at home would be a classic itself.
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
If not
completely outrageous and insane.
I hope you're suggesting that's a good reason _to_ use them :-)
If not, what's insane about a graphics display system that fills an entire
6' rack, contains over 3000 DRAM chips (and about as many TTL devices to
control everything), and has a service manual that contains the wonderful
statement 'Repair the instrument using normal techniques. The supplied set
of Engineering Drawings may be of help'. That is the entire section on
maintenance and repair!
9908
days inactive
9910
days old
13 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
ard12＠eng.cam.ac.uk -
bill＠booster.bothell.washington.edu -
dastar＠crl.com -
eifs＠thenet.co.uk -
gram＠cnct.com -
jim＠calico.litterbox.com -
marvin＠rain.org -
sinasohn＠crl.com -
visimp＠junction.net