From: ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld.invalid
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.os.linux.mandriva, in article
, Jim Beard wrote:
>Moe Trin wrote:
>> I mentioned the "Sony Cybershot" and it's fairly automated. It's
>> about the size of a pack of cigarettes with a "viewfinder" on the
>> entire back. For photographing documents, I'd probably go with a
>> camera tripod to hold the camera in a more/less consistent position
>> relative to the paper, using it where there is "reading" levels of
>> light. At that point, you're pretty well finished the setup -
>> position the document so that it's appropriately centered in the
>> screen on the back of the camera (WYSIWYG), and press the trigger.
>> Next! Have a look at one at Walmart or equal - you should be able
>> to try it right there in the store.
>You make a persuasive argument for the camera, but I am not sure
>I could look at a 2"x 2" or similar viewer and decide if the
>document would be fully legible when it appears on a full-size
>display, perhaps with magnification. Part of that is resolution,
>part lighting, part getting everything right to accomodate the
>paper and ink contrast...
The claimed specs say the Sony is 14.1 megapixels, and the highest
(still photo) resolution is 4320x3240 (=13996800) pixels (1280x720 at
29.97 fps = 720p television). If you photographed an 8x11 piece of
paper and had that fill the image, you're getting right around 400 dpi
(so a flatbed scanner could have better resolution.) But the camera
can be moved "closer" to the subject - close enough to get a 2.25x3.00
object as full image - 1440 dpi. The viewing screen on the back is 3
inch (diagonal, or 2.7x2.0) and has a claimed resolution of 230400
"dots" which is roughly 560x420 or 210 dpi, so what you see on the back
isn't going to be the best. The Sony camera has an HDMI output, which
you can feed into a larger monitor/TV (but the HDMI connector is a
different size from the ones on my DVD player, so I haven't tried it).
Of course it would help if I knew where the darn manual is... ;-)
>Back when: I departed Vietnam REFRAD. The plane refueled at
>Honolulu and made its second touch-down at Travis. Buses took us
>to Oakland, and just short of midnight on the date I departed RVN
>I was outside the main gate of Oakland Army Depot still in full
>uniform looking for a taxi to take me to San Francisco. At
>midnight I was oficially, legally, once again a PFC (private
>f*ing civilian). Crossing the international date line helped.
Ah, yes - young and adaptable. My first trip out was Boston (afternoon
departure) to SFO (change planes) to Honolulu, Guam, and on into Saigon
(mid-morning arrival). I learned my lesson, and the return included
vacation time in Hong Kong, Tokyo and Honolulu. Second trip out was
considered "urgent", so that was a through flight from Geneva to
Bangkok with four fuel stops, overnight, and into Saigon, eventually
returning to Amsterdam with vacation stops en-route. Third trip out
and back was MAC charter via Travis, and fourth was similar to the
first, but I managed a two day stop in Honolulu both ways.
>> That's about 1400 miles - call it 2 1/2 days? I just don't like
>> driving that long. An eighth that distance is more like my limits.
>We differ. I leave the East Coast, stop somewhere along the way
>for sleep, and arrive in Texas or Oklahoma the next day in time
>for dinner. In my younger days, I would drive from SF to Tulsa
>straight through, 30 hours including (only) pit stops.
I think the longest I've done was Connecticut to Cleveland when trying
to bring my car to California (trying - ran into someone with a grudge
against the number 3 - they firebombed the third cars from the front
of the motel, left and right side, while I was sleeping).
>I no longer do that sort of thing, and the need for a second stop for
>sleep is why East Coast-Colorado is a toss-up.
Not for me ;-)
>> Other than cargo ships, is anyone still offering service across the
>> North Atlantic?
>I have no idea. Given that several cruise ships of multiple
>companies are still sailing, I would not be surprised if some of
>those would cross the Atlantic, at least as much for "the cruise"
>as for transport between continents.
While New York <-> Gibraltar might not be too bad, the route to/from
the UK and/or English channel puts you into weather that would be less
than desirable for cruising. Even during the hey-day of Atlantic
liners, deck sports and other outdoor activities were generally limited
to the a day or two nearest New York in summer, less in spring and fall
and maybe not at all in winter. There's a reason that the lowest mark
on a ship's load line (a.k.a. "Plimsoll lines") defines the load limit
for "Winter, North Atlantic".
Old guy
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
