My new digital camera

[Agathon]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
My reply to you, Aggie, got eaten by a crash (linux crash...happens all the time on my workstation )

Video camera to high quality still has many more problems than simple lack of megapixels. Blurring from movement becomes extremely important at pictures in the megapixel range

Sorry. I thought you were talking about regular cameras. I guess the light of the flames made some posts hard to read.

[MRT144]

and secondly you should admit to reading my typing 96k as bitrate not sampling frequency. this is partly my fault because in audio recording its taken for granted that 96k means 96khz

[KrazyHorse]

If you actually meant that to start, then I apologise for misreading you.

But your claim that you can hear a significant difference between music recorded at 96 khz and then downsampled to 44.1 and that recorded at 44.1 is highly suspect.

I've got a good ear (from playing classical violin for 12 years), but some of the claims I've heard made by audiophiles are ridiculous, and often don't stand up to double-blind tests.

[MRT144]

i meant it from the start, which is why i couldnt believe you were lecturing me on something i agreed with and already knew and was telling you.

and im telling you kh, until youre in the studio and you do it, you wont know. im not an audiophile by any means. that implies i actually give a **** about the quality of audio in my leisure. im just telling you how its done and why its done.

and i wish i could orchestrate a double blind test involving 44.1 48 88.1 96k 192k at 24 bit downsampled and dithered to 44.1 16 bit. acoustic instrument like guitar, a u87 for the mic, and have at it.

[MRT144]

and im not going to to BS you into thinking that its an earth shattering difference because its not. its somewhat subtle but its there

[Tattila the Hun]

Erk, it's all about the music, anyways. No matter the media, format, or samplerate, if the audio itself is crap, none of those matter.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by MRT144
and im telling you kh, until youre in the studio and you do it, you wont know. im not an audiophile by any means. that implies i actually give a **** about the quality of audio in my leisure. im just telling you how its done and why its done.

and i wish i could orchestrate a double blind test involving 44.1 48 88.1 96k 192k at 24 bit downsampled and dithered to 44.1 16 bit. acoustic instrument like guitar, a u87 for the mic, and have at it.

If you knew anything about error analysis you would know that doubling the sampling rate increases your signal to noise ratio by at best 40% = 1.4 decibels. This is assuming that the noise is mainly unbiased sampling error, which is untrue. Given that CDs already have s-n levels in the low 90s, I doubt the difference is noticeable.

[MRT144]

if you actually did the experiment and listened to what i said, we dont do it for the SnR ratio. it presents a clearer sound mostly in the mids to highs.

now im sure you can figure out a reason why this happens.

[Tim_Augustus]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
CDs sample at 44.1, with 16 bits per sample

multiply by two for stereo and a CD's bitrate is ~14 kbit/s

You mean ~ 1400 kbit/sec, don't you

44100 * 16 * 2 = 1 411 200 bit/s

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Agathon
It takes OK pics, but I am a total noob with the thing, so I will have to RTFM and work out how to do it better.

Pic of my office.

Samsung monitor FTW !


I just bought one they are the best monitors, taking Sony down pretty badly too

Sony was all about the l33t picture tube so the flat screens are killing them

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ted Striker

Samsung monitor FTW !

I got given one of their printers too. I am very pleased with it.

Samsung

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Agathon

Yeah. I thought that was obvious too.

Hell... I'd hate to see what my papers looked like if they were printed using the same scale of antialiasing as my monitor.

As I recall a standard 35mm film is the equivalent to about 16.5 megapixels. Mass market digital cameras have a long way to go before they are as good as my trusty Nikon 35mm.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Tim_Augustus


You mean ~ 1400 kbit/sec, don't you

44100 * 16 * 2 = 1 411 200 bit/s

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Samsung monitor FTW !


I just bought one they are the best monitors, taking Sony down pretty badly too

Sony was all about the l33t picture tube so the flat screens are killing them

Meh... I prefer my Sony SDM-HS75P (it is a flat screen, btw) to any Samsung monitors at Circuit City. Absolutely brilliant .

[Verto]

Originally posted by Ted Striker


Samsung monitor FTW !


I just bought one they are the best monitors, taking Sony down pretty badly too

Sony was all about the l33t picture tube so the flat screens are killing them

I was under the impression DELL and Apple had the best monitors available.