Anonymous Report This Comment Date: August 03, 2006 02:03PM
Good, very good.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: August 03, 2006 03:06PM
cool..
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: August 03, 2006 05:08PM
nice.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: August 04, 2006 12:04AM
That camera is a piece of junk too -- only 4 mega pixels! Hell, I could draw a
pic with more resolution than that. If you don't have at least eight mega
pixels, then you're still in the Stone Age.
Temuchin Report This Comment Date: August 04, 2006 12:44AM
228144 are you going to post some pics you have taken with your 8mp camera??
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: August 04, 2006 03:48AM
* UNGAWA OOO AA OOOO UHHH HUUH FYRE GOOOOOOOD *
woberto Report This Comment Date: August 04, 2006 04:19AM
Points of note:
1) This image wasted posted by ME so there's a good chance that 4mPx was state
of the art when this pic was actually original.
2) Money usualy determines these things. Unless you are a geek who needs to have
more RAM than the other guys, most of us buy from the lower range.
3) In the professional part of town, they measure these things in Gigapixels, so
8mPx is really quite pathetic but who can afford that stuff?
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: August 06, 2006 09:13PM
8 mp is good enough for most photo features in magazines and newspapers. A
glossy magazine usually only prints in 600-800 dpi, and newspapers are usually
about 300.
Only artsy fartsy photographers would need more resolution so that they could
make big high-res wall art.