I got a digital camera
Mon Feb 24 13:32:53 EST 2003I have had a cheap 35mm analog camera for years. I haven't used it for years. I've basically been afraid to try and find out it was dead, and not wanting to deal with it.
I have been wanting a camera small enough to carry on me at all times, because I feel that such things are far more useful - like my Surefire E2 flashlight, and my Leatherman Wave. Cellphones are another good example. One of my co-workers once pulled a tiny camera out of a pouch on his belt, which I thought was extremely cool, but probably too expensive for my tastes. I suspect it was a Canon analog Elph. I was against getting a digital camera, since analog cameras give you so much more detail. If you get a good picture, you can blow it up to a poster. If you get a good picture with any kind of reasonable resolution digital camera, blowing it up larger than a computer screen is going to be pixelated. So I think I was considering buying an Olympus clamshell analog camera. Never got one.
I started considering getting a camera again. I was talking to some friends about digital cameras. I realized price and size had gone down enough for a high enough resolution image (1600x1200) that it would work for me. Friends had good experiences (and I had seen good results) with Canon digital cameras. I went for the smallest in the line - the Canon S200 Digital Elph - 3.4" x 2.2" x 1.1" (on Thursday, 2/20/02).
Fortunately Kaz was with me when I tried to buy one, and suggested another convenient store when the one I wanted to buy from was out.
I've ordered some extra compactflash for it, and I'm looking into belt pouches.
Everyone seems to agree that so far my best picture is this closeup of Monster:
You can look at most of the pictures I've taken - warning: includes closeups of my nipple piercings. The linked images are about 640x480, not the original size. The index, thumbnails, and linked images were all generated by a script I've started writing. I started writing my own for the same reason I wrote a thumbnail script. Most people, when they resize an image, they specify a maximum resolution they want the results to fit in. That's fine if all of your images are rotated the same way, and have the same proportions (aspect ratio). But if they're different, then the ones that are proportioned less like the chosen target resolution will have fewer pixels, less detail, in their output. So this script generates output with consistent pixel counts. Thumbnails are equivalent to a 100x100 image, and the linked images are equivalent to a 640x480 image.
| next: | no email for me | 2003-03-04 |
| previous: | Relaxed again | 2003-02-17 |
Comment on this page.
Return to Adventures index
Return to Darxus' home page.