[ale] OT: Digital Cameras

Greg Freemyer greg.freemyer at gmail.com
Sat Feb 10 18:56:29 EST 2007


I can't tell you about the "highest" quality images, but for website
photos etc. I really, really like the Kodak technology.

I support an app where they take, transmit via satellite, and archive
thousands of pictures per week.  We need the best quality we can get
out of the smallest feasible Jpegs.  (Satellite is only 9600 baud, so
we try to keep images around 100K.)

During 3 different camera evaluations the Kodak quality vs. picture
size has been a hands down winner.  No comparison at all (but the last
one was 2 or 3 years ago.)

This really matters if your taking pictures for websites, etc.  ie. If
you have limited bandwidth/storage go with the Kodak cameras.  Even in
their lowest quality picture mode they take very good pictures.

As an example with 2 cameras set to their lowest quality mode try
taking a picture of the entire back-end of your car, then try to read
the license tag in the photo.  The Kodak image is pretty clear.
Others are fuzzy.  I've seen some where you can't even come close to
reading the tag.  (Obviously this was one of our test cases.)

As another example, with the Kodak in its lowest quality mode you can
distinguish between a stress fracture in a piece of glass and an
impact fracture.  (This was another test case.  You have to be able to
see the little star pattern that is always around a impact fracture.
We actually used inverse video on the photos to do this test.)

Greg

On 2/10/07, cfowler at outpostsentinel.com <cfowler at outpostsentinel.com> wrote:
>
> MAybe someone on this list knows enough about digital photography
> to answer a question I have.
>
> I have 2 cameras.  1 is a Kodak C743 and the other a Sony DSC-T50.
> The Sony is 7.2mp Kodak 7.1.  Here is what I do not understand.  Why
> are the pciture sizes so different between these cameras?
>
> The Kodak has a 1GB flash and it reports it can hold 700+ images.  The
> Sony has 2GB and it says 550+  The resolutions are the same between
> the images but the file size of the Sony images is almost 2x that
> of the Kodak.  Why is this?  It shit a feature I'm not comparing
> when I buy cameras.  I looked in the Kodak's menu and can
> only find a setting for MP size.  The sony has a fine setting that
> I can tweak.
>
> Being a geek I know that more data can equal better quality and this
> is what has me concerned.
>
> I think I even asked this before.  I have a Cannon G3 and another Kodak.
> The Canon 3 the Kodak 5 and the Canon file size is greater but resolution
> is smaller.
>
> Maybe the Koday C743 and the other Kodak is doing more JPEG compression?  Maybe
> I should stay away from all Kodak products based on what I'm seeing?
>
> Thanks for clearing this up for me.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>


-- 
Greg Freemyer
The Norcross Group
Forensics for the 21st Century



More information about the Ale mailing list