7 messages in edu.ku.nhm.mailman.taxacomdigital images
FromSent OnAttachments
Timothy RoweAug 22, 1995 12:52 pm 
Alan HarveyAug 23, 1995 9:25 am 
Peter RauchAug 23, 1995 9:26 am 
Jim ManhartAug 23, 1995 9:26 am 
Joseph LaferriereAug 23, 1995 10:09 am 
Joseph LaferriereAug 23, 1995 1:27 pm 
Alan HarveyAug 23, 1995 2:56 pm 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:digital imagesActions...
From:Peter Rauch (pet@VIOLET.BERKELEY.EDU)
Date:Aug 23, 1995 9:26:05 am
List:edu.ku.nhm.mailman.taxacom

We do not get nearly the same resolution with a Hi-8mm video camera that can be obtained with 35mm film. However, I would expect that if you had a video system capable of 700 lines of resolution, it would be as high or higher than the resolution of any computer monitor.

But, the resolution of the computer monitor is not the criterion to use. E.g., a 700-line scan can be displayed, in _full_ detail, on a 72-rasterline screen; it's done all the time --a little at a time.

The amount of source information is the primary measure. There are many display systems (which might have low "resolution") that can display portions of images that were scanned at very high resolution. You just can't view the entire (high-res) image at one time. Nonetheless, the detail is captured and available to view; other parameters that can "make light of a low-res display" include appropriate software, enough computer memory, greater depth of grayscale/color, etc. Peter