JPEG fading and Sensor size
cjcampbell
shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
anyway.
This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields emanating
from your computer monitor and other peripherals -- even your disk
drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the sun.
Think of the constant bombardment of your storage media as a kind of
rain. Obviously, larger media such as DVDs and 5.25 inch floppy disks
will be struck by cosmic rays, UV, and other particles much more
frequently than smaller forms of media. Each particle can irrecoverably
destroy some of your data. Back in the old days when disk drives were
12 inch platters (or even larger), data often did not last more than a
few weeks! You should therefore store your most important photos on
storage devices that are as small as possible, and use only one device
at a time, since putting your data on two different drives more than
doubles the risk that your data will be damaged.
Compressing the JPEG file as much as possible will also reduce the
damage done by cosmic rays and UV light.
Another problem with large storage devices also applies to camera
sensors. A larger storage device or camera sensor must have the data
"stretched" over a larger area, creating holes in your pictures. This
is why photos taken with the Canon 5D appear thin and faded compared to
pictures taken with a cell phone. The cell phone has a smaller sensor
and is able to concentrate the picture better. The most advanced
cameras all have smaller sensors for this reason, while primitive DSLRS
must continue to have large sensors in order remain backwards
compatible with lenses and other accessories. Some camera manufacturers
have attempted to load the larger sensors up with more pixels in an
attempt to fill the quantum holes created by stretching the picture too
thinly, but it is obvious that the quantum limits on number of pixels
that can be placed on a large sensor has been surpassed. This is also
why manufacturers of DSLRS tend to use inexpensive CF memory instead of
smaller SD cards. After all, even though the CF card is larger, it does
not appreciably thin out the picture more than it already comes from
the sensor. The Nikon D50 does use SD cards, which accounts for why its
pictures are brighter and sharper than those taken with the nearly
identical D70.
Placing an already too thin picture from a Canon 5D on a giant CD-ROM
will almost guarantee very rapid fading and loss of sharpness. It is
the worst of both worlds.
JPEG quality is also affected by picture size. Obviously, a photo that
has fewer pixels will concentrate the data more and store it in a
smaller area, leaving it less vulnerable to deterioration.
So, if you want JPEG pictures that last a long time, follow these
simple rules:
1) Use a pocket camera with a tiny sensor.
2) Use the highest compression possible.
3) Use the smallest picture size available for your camera.
4) Store it on the smallest memory card available.
5) Make sure there is only one copy.
Charles
<christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Good advice!
should I store my jpegs in the refrigerator, or in an oven where they
stay warm?
dh
https://www.paypal.com/us/mrb/pal=XT5TXXLGSGEGJ
"cjcampbell" <christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142231597....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
-Dave
dh
news:ns7a12t92nrg8ba46...@4ax.com...
You store them in the microwave. Since it is designed to keep microwaves in,
it will also keep them out.
-Dave
Ron Hunter
I hope you follow your own advice.
People who post such stupid and misleading disinformation should reap
the same as they sow.
For those newbies, or non-technical people who might have read the post
quoted here, it is published a bit early. April 1st is a few weeks away.
Zorba the Geek
news:BI6dnXmuPJ_EoYjZ...@giganews.com...
not really safe to be let loose with a camera in the first place.
Mind you, looking at the way 'Joe Public' often use cameras, I wouldn't be
surprised if half of them of them *did* think that this was a serious
article.
Lighten up for God's sake, it was a joke! It certainly made me laugh :o)
Paul Rubin
> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
> anyway.
Best post of the year! ;-).
SimonLW
news:1142231597....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
aren't affected by nanobytes, the tiny bugs nybble on bits.
-S
All Things Mopar
> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have
> such a short shelf life. You can slow the process down
> somewhat by re-copying them every three months, but
> eventually they will fade to almost nothing anyway.
>
> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields
> emanating from your computer monitor and other peripherals
> -- even your disk drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the
> sun.
Where did you get such utter nonsense, the back of the cereal
box? My JPEGs from 198x are still OK, as are later JPEG scans
into the present day, ditto for /all/ my digitals since 2001.
Absolutely 100% OK in everyway.
After your opening paragraphs, I stopped reading. Can't be
anything here that is even remotely correct. Don't bother
replying, you'll be talking to the air, troll.
--
ATM, aka Jerry
"Whether You Think You CAN Or CAN'T, You're Right." – Henry
Ford
John Fryatt
> Today cjcampbell commented courteously on the subject at hand
>
>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have
>> such a short shelf life. You can slow the process down
>> somewhat by re-copying them every three months, but
>> eventually they will fade to almost nothing anyway.
>>
>> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields
>> emanating from your computer monitor and other peripherals
>> -- even your disk drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the
>> sun.
>
> Where did you get such utter nonsense, the back of the cereal
> box? My JPEGs from 198x are still OK, as are later JPEG scans
> into the present day, ditto for /all/ my digitals since 2001.
> Absolutely 100% OK in everyway.
>
> After your opening paragraphs, I stopped reading. Can't be
> anything here that is even remotely correct. Don't bother
> replying, you'll be talking to the air, troll.
Pop down to the shops and get a new sense of humour, the one you're
using now is worn out. :-)
Randall Ainsworth
Zorba the Geek
news:Xns97854F5D...@216.196.97.131...
> Today cjcampbell commented courteously on the subject at hand
>
>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have
>> such a short shelf life. You can slow the process down
>> somewhat by re-copying them every three months, but
>> eventually they will fade to almost nothing anyway.
>>
>> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields
>> emanating from your computer monitor and other peripherals
>> -- even your disk drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the
>> sun.
>
> Where did you get such utter nonsense, the back of the cereal
> box? My JPEGs from 198x are still OK, as are later JPEG scans
> into the present day, ditto for /all/ my digitals since 2001.
> Absolutely 100% OK in everyway.
>
> After your opening paragraphs, I stopped reading. Can't be
> anything here that is even remotely correct. Don't bother
> replying, you'll be talking to the air, troll.
>
>
All Things Mopar
hand
look in the mirror, moron, then talk to yourself - you're gone.
All Things Mopar
hand
> "All Things Mopar" <nuno...@beez.wax> wrote in message
> news:Xns97854F5D...@216.196.97.131...
>> Today cjcampbell commented courteously on the subject at
>> hand
>>
>>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos
>>> have such a short shelf life. You can slow the process
>>> down somewhat by re-copying them every three months, but
>>> eventually they will fade to almost nothing anyway.
>>>
>>> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic
>>> fields emanating from your computer monitor and other
>>> peripherals -- even your disk drive -- and cosmic rays
>>> coming from the sun.
>>
>> Where did you get such utter nonsense, the back of the
>> cereal box? My JPEGs from 198x are still OK, as are later
>> JPEG scans into the present day, ditto for /all/ my
>> digitals since 2001. Absolutely 100% OK in everyway.
>>
>> After your opening paragraphs, I stopped reading. Can't be
>> anything here that is even remotely correct. Don't bother
>> replying, you'll be talking to the air, troll.
>>
>>
> Oh dear, another grey humourless being with a sense of
> humour lobotomy!
>
people in this NG often tend to be of several categories:
elitists, morons who post OT crap to entice more morons to
reply, and trolls. Which are you? All of the above? In any
event, I tire quickly of crap on this NG that gets in the way
of its purpose. So, no, I have no sense of humor (there's no
"u" in "humor" where I live) when it comes to nonsense, and I
have even less when it comes to trolls - like you. Don't
reply, I won't see you anymore, troll.
Zorba the Geek
whether you chose to read it or not. Personally I'm none of the above, but
there do seem seem to be other categories of people on here, such as
pedantic bores, newsgroup nazis and aggressive loud mouths. I note your
quaint colonial variation of the English language, and therefore make
allowances for it without commenting further.
I can understand people on here being tired of the vulgar spam, but
occasional innocuous posts, that inject a rare moment of levity are surely
harmless, unless of course you have some vindictive desire to deny the world
a brief moment of light-hearted relief, by imposing your personal lack of
humour on the whole group.
Bill Funk
<nuno...@beez.wax> wrote:
>Today cjcampbell commented courteously on the subject at hand
>
>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have
>> such a short shelf life. You can slow the process down
>> somewhat by re-copying them every three months, but
>> eventually they will fade to almost nothing anyway.
>>
>> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields
>> emanating from your computer monitor and other peripherals
>> -- even your disk drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the
>> sun.
>
>Where did you get such utter nonsense, the back of the cereal
>box? My JPEGs from 198x are still OK, as are later JPEG scans
>into the present day, ditto for /all/ my digitals since 2001.
>Absolutely 100% OK in everyway.
>
>After your opening paragraphs, I stopped reading. Can't be
>anything here that is even remotely correct. Don't bother
>replying, you'll be talking to the air, troll.
That whooshing sound you heard ...
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
Bill Funk
<nuno...@beez.wax> wrote:
>So, no, I have no sense of humor (there's no
>"u" in "humor" where I live)
Um, ...
Never mind.
John Fryatt
> Today John Fryatt commented courteously on the subject at
> hand
>
>> All Things Mopar wrote:
>>> Today cjcampbell commented courteously on the subject at
>>> hand
>>>
>>>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos
>>>> have such a short shelf life. You can slow the process
>>>> down somewhat by re-copying them every three months, but
>>>> eventually they will fade to almost nothing anyway.
>>>>
>>>> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic
>>>> fields emanating from your computer monitor and other
>>>> peripherals -- even your disk drive -- and cosmic rays
>>>> coming from the sun.
>>> Where did you get such utter nonsense, the back of the
>>> cereal box? My JPEGs from 198x are still OK, as are later
>>> JPEG scans into the present day, ditto for /all/ my
>>> digitals since 2001. Absolutely 100% OK in everyway.
>>>
>>> After your opening paragraphs, I stopped reading. Can't be
>>> anything here that is even remotely correct. Don't bother
>>> replying, you'll be talking to the air, troll.
>> Pop down to the shops and get a new sense of humour, the
>> one you're using now is worn out. :-)
> look in the mirror, moron, then talk to yourself - you're gone.
Oh, 'bye then. Humourless nerk.
Zorba the Geek
news:vl4b121tl0b7is7et...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 08:07:22 -0600, All Things Mopar
> <nuno...@beez.wax> wrote:
>
>>So, no, I have no sense of humor (there's no
>>"u" in "humor" where I live)
>
> Um, ...
> Never mind.
>
>
PossumTrot
aluminum helmet?
"cjcampbell" <christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142231597....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
Jørn Dahl-Stamnes
> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
> anyway.
>
> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields emanating
> from your computer monitor and other peripherals -- even your disk
> drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the sun.
>
> Think of the constant bombardment of your storage media as a kind of
> rain. Obviously, larger media such as DVDs and 5.25 inch floppy disks
> will be struck by cosmic rays, UV, and other particles much more
> frequently than smaller forms of media. Each particle can irrecoverably
> destroy some of your data. Back in the old days when disk drives were
> 12 inch platters (or even larger), data often did not last more than a
> few weeks! You should therefore store your most important photos on
> storage devices that are as small as possible, and use only one device
> at a time, since putting your data on two different drives more than
> doubles the risk that your data will be damaged.
I have solved this problem by storing all my RAW files by writing down the
sequence of 0's and 1's on regular paper... As you probably know, paper can
be read after several 1000 years if stored properly... ;-)
John McWilliams
> Is it April Fool's Day already? Or is this post done by someone using an
> aluminum helmet?
>
> "cjcampbell" <christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1142231597....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
>>shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
>>every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
>>anyway. << Snipped bits out >>
It's a warm up for 4/1. Well done!
--
John McWilliams
"It's ever so nice to trim replies when you can".
~ Margeret Meade
David Dyer-Bennet
> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
> anyway.
>
> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields emanating
> from your computer monitor and other peripherals -- even your disk
> drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the sun.
ROFLAMO! Excellent job! You have captured the essence of net-kookism
here, and written an excellently humorous article.
(I was in some doubt for a while, but the summary of recommended
practices at the end settled the issue; you definitely intended this
as humor.)
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd...@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
Darrell Larose
that I keep in a lead box down in my old bomb shelter.
Darrell Larose
"cjcampbell" <christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142231597....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
> anyway.
>
> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields emanating
> from your computer monitor and other peripherals -- even your disk
> drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the sun.
>
> Think of the constant bombardment of your storage media as a kind of
> rain. Obviously, larger media such as DVDs and 5.25 inch floppy disks
> will be struck by cosmic rays, UV, and other particles much more
> frequently than smaller forms of media. Each particle can irrecoverably
> destroy some of your data.
I align all my CD's with the edge facing the rays, that way only 1.3mm of
the disc is exposed. It's a challenge to keep shifting the disc 7/24. Man I
really need to get some sleep, but gotta save my images.
> Back in the old days when disk drives were
> 12 inch platters (or even larger), data often did not last more than a
> few weeks!
>
The 12" laser discs usually suffered from physical damage ie: laser rot
where the media delaminated.
Bob Williams
cjcampbell wrote:
> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
> anyway.
>
> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields emanating
> from your computer monitor and other peripherals -- even your disk
> drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the sun.
>
> Think of the constant bombardment of your storage media as a kind of
> rain. Obviously, larger media such as DVDs and 5.25 inch floppy disks
> will be struck by cosmic rays, UV, and other particles much more
> frequently than smaller forms of media. Each particle can irrecoverably
> destroy some of your data. Back in the old days when disk drives were
> 12 inch platters (or even larger), data often did not last more than a
> few weeks! You should therefore store your most important photos on
> storage devices that are as small as possible, and use only one device
> at a time, since putting your data on two different drives more than
> doubles the risk that your data will be damaged.
>
OMIGOD!!
The process is much more complicated than I ever imagined.
Where can I read more about these incredible phenomena? <G>
Bob Williams
Battleax
"All Things Mopar" <nuno...@beez.wax> wrote in message
snip
So, no, I have no sense of humor (there's no
> "u" in "humor" where I live) when it comes to nonsense,
snip
So then it's "hmor" where you live? Whgat colour is the sky there?
steve
will be to the edge of your hard drive due to centrifugal
force. Bit density is a measure of the complexity of a file divided
by its size.
I usually save files as tiffs because their relitavely
low bit density tends to result in the files being stored
nearer to the centre of the disk where they should be
safer from fading.
I also clear all my CF cards to zero to lighten the load
when out hiking. Obviously the weight increases when
I take photographs so I usually limit myself to two or
three images a day unless I'm feeling really fit.
Steve
On 12 Mar 2006 22:33:17 -0800, "cjcampbell"
Darrell Larose
"All Things Mopar" <nuno...@beez.wax> wrote in message
> Today Zorba the Geek commented courteously on the subject at
> hand
>
>> "All Things Mopar" <nuno...@beez.wax> wrote in message
>> news:Xns97854F5D...@216.196.97.131...
>>> Today cjcampbell commented courteously on the subject at
>>> hand
>>>
>>
> elitists, morons who post OT crap to entice more morons to
> reply, and trolls. Which are you? All of the above? In any
> event, I tire quickly of crap on this NG that gets in the way
> of its purpose. So, no, I have no sense of humor (there's no
> "u" in "humor" where I live) when it comes to nonsense, and I
> have even less when it comes to trolls - like you. Don't
> reply, I won't see you anymore, troll.
>
when it comes to troulls ;)
John McWilliams
Fast tip 'o' the day: You can print out the RAW files' O's and 1's on
light weight bond paper. Saves 27 hours work per image, but does cost
something for ink and, well, the paper you'd use anyway.
I've just completed archiving my last shoot of 64 images, and it took a
palette and a half, weighing about 3/4 of a ton.
--
John McWilliams
I know that you believe you understood what you think I said, but I'm
not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Måns Rullgård
> "cjcampbell" <christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1142231597....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
>> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
>> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
>> anyway.
>>
>> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields emanating
>> from your computer monitor and other peripherals -- even your disk
>> drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the sun.
>>
>> Think of the constant bombardment of your storage media as a kind of
>> rain. Obviously, larger media such as DVDs and 5.25 inch floppy disks
>> will be struck by cosmic rays, UV, and other particles much more
>> frequently than smaller forms of media. Each particle can irrecoverably
>> destroy some of your data.
>
> I align all my CD's with the edge facing the rays, that way only 1.3mm of
> the disc is exposed. It's a challenge to keep shifting the disc 7/24. Man I
> really need to get some sleep, but gotta save my images.
If you do this it is useful to put some large junk files on the outer
parts of the disc. These files will absorb most of the rays before
they reach the precious images closer to the center. For best
protection, use shield files with a good structure capable absorbing a
large amount of rays before being saturated. Then you won't have to
burn new CDs so often.
--
Måns Rullgård
m...@inprovide.com
John McWilliams
> "Darrell Larose" <sp...@this.invalid> writes:
>>I align all my CD's with the edge facing the rays, that way only 1.3mm of
>>the disc is exposed. It's a challenge to keep shifting the disc 7/24. Man I
>>really need to get some sleep, but gotta save my images.
>
>
> If you do this it is useful to put some large junk files on the outer
> parts of the disc. These files will absorb most of the rays before
> they reach the precious images closer to the center. For best
> protection, use shield files with a good structure capable absorbing a
> large amount of rays before being saturated. Then you won't have to
> burn new CDs so often.
Double wrapping the HD in heavy duty tin foil will help, too. And be
sure to wrap the DVDs and CDs individually in foil with another layer
around the jewel box.
[Anyone remember the SNL skits "The Anal-Retentive Chef"?]
--
John McWilliams
Jørn Dahl-Stamnes
NO NO NO!!! Printer inc do fade due to background radiation. It must be
written by pencils and you must use font size 72 or better!!
--
--
Jørn Dahl-Stamnes
http://www.dahl-stamnes.net/dahls/Foto/
John McWilliams
> John McWilliams wrote:
>>>I have solved this problem by storing all my RAW files by writing down
>>>the sequence of 0's and 1's on regular paper... As you probably know,
>>>paper can be read after several 1000 years if stored properly... ;-)
>>
>>Fast tip 'o' the day: You can print out the RAW files' O's and 1's on
>>light weight bond paper. Saves 27 hours work per image, but does cost
>>something for ink and, well, the paper you'd use anyway.
>>
>>I've just completed archiving my last shoot of 64 images, and it took a
>>palette and a half, weighing about 3/4 of a ton.
>
>
> NO NO NO!!! Printer inc do fade due to background radiation. It must be
> written by pencils and you must use font size 72 or better!!
Aaaach; you are right. But I forgot to mention wrapping the finished
papers in tin foil, something I suggest you do immediately.
--
John McWilliams
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
- Albert Einstein
Jørn Dahl-Stamnes
> Jørn Dahl-Stamnes wrote:
>
>> John McWilliams wrote:
>
>>>>I have solved this problem by storing all my RAW files by writing down
>>>>the sequence of 0's and 1's on regular paper... As you probably know,
>>>>paper can be read after several 1000 years if stored properly... ;-)
>>>
>>>Fast tip 'o' the day: You can print out the RAW files' O's and 1's on
>>>light weight bond paper. Saves 27 hours work per image, but does cost
>>>something for ink and, well, the paper you'd use anyway.
>>>
>>>I've just completed archiving my last shoot of 64 images, and it took a
>>>palette and a half, weighing about 3/4 of a ton.
>>
>>
>> NO NO NO!!! Printer inc do fade due to background radiation. It must be
>> written by pencils and you must use font size 72 or better!!
>
> Aaaach; you are right. But I forgot to mention wrapping the finished
> papers in tin foil, something I suggest you do immediately.
Wooops... I'll do that at once!! And I better build a shield with 1-2 meter
lead walls to store the papers...
Måns Rullgård
For really good preservation, roll the papers up and place them in a
cave near the Dead Sea. It's been known to work in the past.
--
Måns Rullgård
m...@inprovide.com
David
news:yw1xmzfu...@agrajag.inprovide.com...
> "Darrell Larose" <sp...@this.invalid> writes:
>
>> "cjcampbell" <christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1142231597....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
>>> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
>>> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> rain. Obviously, larger media such as DVDs and 5.25 inch floppy disks
>>> will be struck by cosmic rays, UV, and other particles much more
>>> frequently than smaller forms of media. Each particle can irrecoverably
>>> destroy some of your data.
>>
>> I align all my CD's with the edge facing the rays, that way only 1.3mm of
>> the disc is exposed. It's a challenge to keep shifting the disc 7/24. Man
>> I
>> really need to get some sleep, but gotta save my images.
>
> If you do this it is useful to put some large junk files on the outer
> parts of the disc. These files will absorb most of the rays before
> they reach the precious images closer to the center. For best
> protection, use shield files with a good structure capable absorbing a
> large amount of rays before being saturated. Then you won't have to
> burn new CDs so often.
>
> --
> Måns Rullgård
> m...@inprovide.com
How about using a green felt marker on the edge of the disc? I've heard that
that helps improve the focus and saturation of the bytes and reduces random
pixel wandering....
David
AZ Nomad
>"Darrell Larose" <sp...@this.invalid> writes:
Why don't you get some CD protectors from the same place you get your
foil undies and hats?
Måns Rullgård
> How about using a green felt marker on the edge of the disc? I've
> heard that that helps improve the focus and saturation of the bytes
> and reduces random pixel wandering....
Yes, coloring the edges stops the red light from the laser escaping
sideways when the disc is read. This reduces turbulence in the data
flow. Turbulence can lead to bit migration, which in JPEGs manifests
itself as wandering or flickering pixels.
--
Måns Rullgård
m...@inprovide.com
Scott W
card it only takes 600,000 cards to store a 8MP image as 16 bit/color.
At 2000 cards / box this is only 300 boxes of punched cards.
Looking at this another way all the data on a 1 Gig flash card can be
stored on just 6,250 boxes of cards.
Scott
JohnR66
news:1142286393....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Dave Martindale
>The centrifugal force generated by the rapidly spinning platter can knock
>the pixels out of alignment and cause the image resolution to degrade.
>With the new 10,000 RPM drives, there have been cases of pixels actually
>flying of the platter !
Just convert the image to a cylindrical projection using something like
Panorama Tools, and then it will fit on the disk drive perfectly without
being stressed.
Dave
Dave Martindale
>I align all my CD's with the edge facing the rays, that way only 1.3mm of
>the disc is exposed. It's a challenge to keep shifting the disc 7/24. Man I
>really need to get some sleep, but gotta save my images.
Use an old astronomical telescope mount, with the CD box mounted where
the telescope once was. Align the polar axis of the mount with the
north (or south) pole just as if you were going to do some observing,
rotate the mount until the discs are edge-on to the sun, turn the drive
on, and they will stay with their edges facing the sun 24 hours a day.
Dave
William Oertell
>the pixels out of alignment and cause the image resolution to degrade.
>With the new 10,000 RPM drives, there have been cases of pixels actually
>flying of the platter !
Is that what happened to my jpegs?!!! Now I know. And here I thought I
had poltergeists in my hard drive.
William Oertell
those nasty neutrinos will shoot right through it, and when one of those
crashes into one of the nucleii of the CD, there goes the whole thing. And
what's the point, anyway? The sun will eventually turn into a red giant and
turn the planet into a charcoal briquette.
Nionyn
news:121c9m1...@news.supernews.com...
I'm planning a barbecue - you're all invited!
Ferd
>"Måns Rullgård" <m...@inprovide.com> wrote in message
>news:yw1xmzfu...@agrajag.inprovide.com...
>> "Darrell Larose" <sp...@this.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> "cjcampbell" <christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1142231597....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
>>>> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
>>>> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
>>>> anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Think of the constant bombardment of your storage media as a kind of
>>>> rain. Obviously, larger media such as DVDs and 5.25 inch floppy disks
>>>> will be struck by cosmic rays, UV, and other particles much more
>>>> frequently than smaller forms of media. Each particle can irrecoverably
>>>> destroy some of your data.
>>>
>>> I align all my CD's with the edge facing the rays, that way only 1.3mm of
>>> the disc is exposed. It's a challenge to keep shifting the disc 7/24. Man
>>> I
>>> really need to get some sleep, but gotta save my images.
You guys are thick. All you do is cover the center hole of the CD with
A circle of sticking plaster. Its an old trick, always works
Ferd
Bill Funk
And that's the GOOD news!
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
Charles
<oerte...@pacbell.net> wrote:
When that happens, what's the recommended shutter speed and /f stop?
Ron Hunter
> "Ron Hunter" <rphu...@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:BI6dnXmuPJ_EoYjZ...@giganews.com...
>> cjcampbell wrote:
>>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
>>> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
>>> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> from your computer monitor and other peripherals -- even your disk
>>> drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the sun.
>>>
>>> rain. Obviously, larger media such as DVDs and 5.25 inch floppy disks
>>> will be struck by cosmic rays, UV, and other particles much more
>>> frequently than smaller forms of media. Each particle can irrecoverably
>>> 12 inch platters (or even larger), data often did not last more than a
>>> few weeks! You should therefore store your most important photos on
>>> storage devices that are as small as possible, and use only one device
>>> at a time, since putting your data on two different drives more than
>>> doubles the risk that your data will be damaged.
>>>
>> People who post such stupid and misleading disinformation should reap the
>> same as they sow.
>>
>> For those newbies, or non-technical people who might have read the post >
>> quoted here, it is published a bit early. April 1st is a few weeks away.
>>
>>
> If anybody's so thick as to not realise that this is a joke, then they're
> not really safe to be let loose with a camera in the first place.
>
> Mind you, looking at the way 'Joe Public' often use cameras, I wouldn't be
> surprised if half of them of them *did* think that this was a serious
> article.
>
> Lighten up for God's sake, it was a joke! It certainly made me laugh :o)
>
>
Sorry, but there ARE a lot of people who will believe such jokes to be
the truth. And look at how many people drive cars knowing nothing about
how they work, and caring less. I spent about an hour on the phone
yesterday with my wife who was trying to check the tire pressure (she is
out of town), and attach the air pump to the low tire. Not everyone can
be an expert at everything. The trouble is that after someone posts
such a joke, we spend months dispelling the misconceptions new users get
from it.
Ron Hunter
> "All Things Mopar" <nuno...@beez.wax> wrote in message
> news:Xns97855CD4...@216.196.97.131...
>> Today Zorba the Geek commented courteously on the subject at
>> hand
>>
>>> "All Things Mopar" <nuno...@beez.wax> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns97854F5D...@216.196.97.131...
>>>> Today cjcampbell commented courteously on the subject at
>>>> hand
>>>>
>>>>> have such a short shelf life. You can slow the process
>>>>> down somewhat by re-copying them every three months, but
>>>>> eventually they will fade to almost nothing anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic
>>>>> fields emanating from your computer monitor and other
>>>>> peripherals -- even your disk drive -- and cosmic rays
>>>>> coming from the sun.
>>>> cereal box? My JPEGs from 198x are still OK, as are later
>>>> JPEG scans into the present day, ditto for /all/ my
>>>> digitals since 2001. Absolutely 100% OK in everyway.
>>>>
>>>> After your opening paragraphs, I stopped reading. Can't be
>>>> anything here that is even remotely correct. Don't bother
>>>> replying, you'll be talking to the air, troll.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Oh dear, another grey humourless being with a sense of
>>> humour lobotomy!
>>>
>> people in this NG often tend to be of several categories:
>> elitists, morons who post OT crap to entice more morons to
>> reply, and trolls. Which are you? All of the above? In any
>> event, I tire quickly of crap on this NG that gets in the way
>> of its purpose. So, no, I have no sense of humor (there's no
>> "u" in "humor" where I live) when it comes to nonsense, and I
>> have even less when it comes to trolls - like you. Don't
>> reply, I won't see you anymore, troll.
>>
>>
> whether you chose to read it or not. Personally I'm none of the above, but
> there do seem seem to be other categories of people on here, such as
> pedantic bores, newsgroup nazis and aggressive loud mouths. I note your
> quaint colonial variation of the English language, and therefore make
> allowances for it without commenting further.
>
> I can understand people on here being tired of the vulgar spam, but
> occasional innocuous posts, that inject a rare moment of levity are surely
> harmless, unless of course you have some vindictive desire to deny the world
> a brief moment of light-hearted relief, by imposing your personal lack of
> humour on the whole group.
>
>
The problem is that many people find such 'levity' misleading, and
confusing. Then those of us who are her to HELP spend months dispelling
the negative effects of such a post. You might find it funny, and it
might have been intended to be funny, but some users will find it just
plain confusing, or worse, misleading.
It is not a matter of humor (or humour if you prefer), but of good
sense, and propriety.
Ron Hunter
> Good thing I shoot RAW.
Hummm. Get cold in the winter? Grin.
Ron Hunter
> cjcampbell wrote:
>
>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
>> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
>> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
>> anyway.
>
> images on a hard drive.
> The centrifugal force generated by the rapidly spinning platter can knock
> the pixels out of alignment and cause the image resolution to degrade.
> With the new 10,000 RPM drives, there have been cases of pixels actually
> flying of the platter !
>
> will save them from this constant spinning and as a result the pixels
> won't become scrambled. (CD drives do spin when they're read, but not
> nearly as fast as a hard drive platter).
>
> There is some evidence that storing your CDs in the fridge will further
> extend the life of the image, but there has been no hard data on this
> yet.
>
>
>
>
JOking aside, there are recorded cases of DVD and CDs actually coming
apart (dangerously) when spun at the new high speeds. HD disks are, at
least, safely enclosed in a metal box, so were one to come apart (very
rare), it doesn't represent any safety hazard (except to the data on it).
David J. Littleboy
Sunny 16, of course.
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
All Things Mopar
> The problem is that many people find such 'levity'
> misleading, and confusing. Then those of us who are her to
> HELP spend months dispelling the negative effects of such a
> post. You might find it funny, and it might have been
> intended to be funny, but some users will find it just
> plain confusing, or worse, misleading.
>
> It is not a matter of humor (or humour if you prefer), but
> of good sense, and propriety.
This is exactly the point I was trying to make, Ron. I can tell
the obvious OT crap but it often takes some reading - wasting
time - to find out that a thread I'm interested in is some form
of "humour". It is too bad that there drivel sort of OT stuff
goes on and on and on for thousands of posts, obscuring the real
value of this NG. And, for me, it isn't bandwidth, it is human-
width - trying to separate the wheat from the (growing) chaff.
--
ATM, aka Jerry
"Whether You Think You CAN Or CAN'T, You're Right." – Henry Ford
dh
https://www.paypal.com/us/mrb/pal=XT5TXXLGSGEGJnews:vdWdnfa2cZRkGYvZ...@giganews.com...
It's sad but true. A lot of people read the lobotomy thread at
rec.surgery.home. After that, there was nothing left for them except to come
here and teach photography.
dh
news:1buc121qd2ahtt9fo...@4ax.com...
I don't know, but there is going to be a lot of cheap fast lenses on eBay.
Mark˛
> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a
> short shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by
> re-copying them every three months, but eventually they will fade to
> almost nothing anyway.
>
> This deterioration is caused by UV rays and magnetic fields emanating
> from your computer monitor and other peripherals -- even your disk
> drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the sun.
This entire problem is easily solved by simply wearing a foil beanie.
Mark˛
Nah...Red giants are only bright enough for about not-very-sunny 8.
:)
Tom2000
<christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
>shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
>every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
>anyway.
>
This is an old wives tale.
The Wilhelm institute has rated the useful life of a .jpg at over
100 years, as long as you don't continually expose your storage media
to direct sunlight.
cjcampbell
Ron Hunter wrote:
> JOking aside, there are recorded cases of DVD and CDs actually coming
> apart (dangerously) when spun at the new high speeds. HD disks are, at
> least, safely enclosed in a metal box, so were one to come apart (very
> rare), it doesn't represent any safety hazard (except to the data on it).
Actually, Ron, and all kidding aside, in the old days of larger hard
drives there were a few instances of people being badly injured by a
disintegrating hard drive. But that was a long, long time ago, back in
the days of giant mainframes in specially air conditioned rooms. I was
unable to find a specific example on the Internet, though, of anyone
being injured by any kind of drive, whether a hard drive or a CD or
DVD. The hard drives I can understand, those incidents happened long
before the Internet was invented.
cjcampbell
All Things Mopar wrote:
>
> Where did you get such utter nonsense, the back of the cereal
> box? My JPEGs from 198x are still OK, as are later JPEG scans
> into the present day, ditto for /all/ my digitals since 2001.
> Absolutely 100% OK in everyway.
>
> After your opening paragraphs, I stopped reading. Can't be
> anything here that is even remotely correct. Don't bother
> replying, you'll be talking to the air, troll.
>
Of course, you went and quoted the entire original post anyway, if you
want to quibble about Usenet manners.
Judging by the number of people you claim to have kill-filed you are
probably feeling a little bit lonely by now.
cjcampbell
Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> I hope you follow your own advice.
> People who post such stupid and misleading disinformation should reap
> the same as they sow.
>
> For those newbies, or non-technical people who might have read the post
> quoted here, it is published a bit early. April 1st is a few weeks away.
Sorry, Ron. In the future, I will avoid posting any sort of humor.
Nothing but dead seriousness from me from now on. I would not want
another severe tongue lashing from you. No, sir. I just feel terrible
that there might be someone so stupid as to not recognize humor when
they see it. And, Ron, I will not even compare you to the guys rioting
because they were offended by cartoons. That would be outrageous. Why,
next thing you know, if humor were allowed to run amok, people would be
laughing or acting as if they had something to be happy about. We sure
wouldn't want that, would we? People should face up to their
existential loneliness, and despair. Why right have we to be laugh or
be happy when there is such poverty and misery in the world? The
unsmiling, empty stars gaze down on us with cold, unfeeling hearts. We
should acknowledge only the uselessness of our lives, that in the end
we are nothing better than the slime from which we sprang.
Besides, Cthulhu waits.
All Things Mopar
Actually, the number of morons is quite small, so I don't feel
lonely at all. And, I doubt I'll miss you - plonk!
Zorba the Geek
>
> Actually, the number of morons is quite small, so I don't feel
> lonely at all. And, I doubt I'll miss you - plonk!
>
>
Bill Funk
wrote:
That whooshing sound you heard ...
Tom2000
<christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Sorry, Ron. In the future, I will avoid posting any sort of humor.
>
Hey, no!
Don't stop. I thought your posting was hilarious! As was the
previous thread on .jpg aging. (I've gotta admit that I didn't
read too far into either thread, but I the premise gave me a good
chuckle.)
Well done, folks!
Tom
dh
news:Xns97874932...@216.196.97.131...
I was wondering if you would go ahead and killfile me. The more I read about
your sense of humor, the more I think about how I laugh everytime I smoke
one of those Hemi lovers in my Toyota. So far, I'm around 12 for 12 and I
look back and never see them laughing. I think mopar has played a cruel joke
on people and now they have no humor.
-Dave
Scott W
when the sun turns into a red giant? It is going to be getting the
white balance right that will be the big problem.
Scott
Måns Rullgård
By that time we'll be talking about red balance, or our eyes will have
adapted so things still look white. Hence no need to worry.
--
Måns Rullgård
m...@inprovide.com
Tom2000
>Are you guy all totally nuts worrying about what shutter speed to use
>when the sun turns into a red giant? It is going to be getting the
>white balance right that will be the big problem.
>
ROTFL !!!
ASAAR
>>>So, no, I have no sense of humor (there's no
>>>"u" in "humor" where I live)
>>
>> Um, ...
>> Never mind.
>>
>>
> LOL, I missed that one the first time :o)
You haven't missed nearly as many as the hmorless Mopar
mega-plonker. He also gets extremely perturbed by people that try
to answer his questions but don't do it in the manner his insists
upon. I think in this case the outrage is feigned. After having
posted so many messages going far deeper into the intricacies of
digital images than most people here ever consider (not to mention
his recent posts implying extensive computer knowledge by detailing
how he performs backups and backups and backups ad infinitum) he
must have been quite embarrassed to have been so easily taken in by
April Fool type humor that wouldn't have gotten past the average
novice. Now I'm left eagerly awaiting another of his plonks. They
tend to fade faster than JPGs, you know. :)
ASAAR
>> If anybody's so thick as to not realise that this is a joke, then they're
>> not really safe to be let loose with a camera in the first place.
>> . . .
>> Lighten up for God's sake, it was a joke! It certainly made me laugh :o)
>>
> Sorry, but there ARE a lot of people who will believe such jokes to be
> the truth. And look at how many people drive cars knowing nothing
> about how they work, and caring less. I spent about an hour on the
> phone yesterday with my wife who was trying to check the tire pressure
> (she is out of town), and attach the air pump to the low tire. Not
> everyone can be an expert at everything. The trouble is that after
> someone posts such a joke, we spend months dispelling the
> misconceptions new users get from it.
If you're implying that your wife is so thick that she'd also be
taken in by the OP, you'd better keep her away from your computer or
what she'll do to you might be more than just raising your pressure.
:)
Take another look at the OP. Only an utter fool would be taken in
by it. And most of those would get the joke if they read a couple
more replies in what is turning into a fairly long thread. You
weren't taken in, but the Mopar Guy was. Interesting, that, don't
you think? For the record, I don't think that he's a moron, but his
folly might provide convincing evidence that there's real value in
the OP, and that some people really deserve what they reap. <g>
ASAAR
>> I hope you follow your own advice.
>> People who post such stupid and misleading disinformation
>> should reap the same as they sow.
> . . .
> Sorry, Ron. In the future, I will avoid posting any sort of humor.
> Nothing but dead seriousness from me from now on. I would not
> want another severe tongue lashing from you.
Please don't. Despite a serious humor deficit, Ron's a pretty
nice guy. Show him some compassion and tolerance, and to prove it,
why don't you get out a reaper to cut down a present and then send
him a nice, delicious, ripe, well wrapped durian?
ASAAR
>> Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have such a short
>> shelf life. You can slow the process down somewhat by re-copying them
>> every three months, but eventually they will fade to almost nothing
>> anyway.
>
> This is an old wives tale.
>
> The Wilhelm institute has rated the useful life of a .jpg at over
> 100 years, as long as you don't continually expose your storage media
> to direct sunlight.
Nonsense. Ole Henry knows that one size doesn't fit all. If you
want cheap, high quality CDs, the ones you burn yourself are
adequate. But as with the difference with printers having dye vs.
pigmented inks having large particle sizes, dye based CDs only last
a small fraction of 100 years before the images deteriorate
irretrievably. Hard drives are the best, being comparable to silver
halide for longevity. Somewhere in between are commercially
produced CDs.
For those that burn their own, Henry Wilhelm suggests using CDs
using either a microporous substrate or that at least have a
swellable coating to protect the precious but fragile bits. But
even so called Microporous CDs aren't very effective against ozone
and airborne pollutants. There's another solution that may help,
but it may not be entirely satisfactory. In a magazine interview he
gave in 2003, Henry Wilhelm said:
> Lamination can be a very good solution. It's just that, certainly
> on the desktop, and even for fairly large-scale use . . . it's an extra
> and potentially expensive step.
Note: The interview from which this quote was scandalously,
scurrilously snipped was conducted by Chris Maher and Larry Berman
and appeared in the Nov. 2003 issue of Shutterbug. References
listed at the end of the interview were:
www.wilhelm-research.com
Chris Maher and Larry Berman are photographers, writers, and web
designers. Visit their websites at www.BermanGraphics.com and
www.InfraredDreams.com
ASAAR
>> This is an old wives tale.
>>
>> The Wilhelm institute has rated the useful life of a .jpg at over
>> 100 years, as long as you don't continually expose your storage media
>> to direct sunlight.
>
> That whooshing sound you heard ...
Is probably identical to the sound that just passed by you! <g>
Note that Wilhelm discusses and tests print longevity. NOT jpg
longevity. And even though some people may, I don't think that he
refers to print paper as storage media. :)
ASAAR
> Forget it, folks. No matter what you wrap your CDs or hard drive in
> those nasty neutrinos will shoot right through it, and when one of those
> crashes into one of the nucleii of the CD, there goes the whole thing. And
> what's the point, anyway? The sun will eventually turn into a red giant
> and turn the planet into a charcoal briquette.
But if you have a mile high stack of CDs, how many centuries will
it take for the first fatal collision? And in any case, the embers
of the Earth Briquette (brought to us as an unintended serious
consequence of a Halliburton, Inc contract.) will probably have
cooled long before the sun goes red giant!!!
ASAAR
>> turn the planet into a charcoal briquette.
>
> I'm planning a barbecue - you're all invited!
"We'll all go together when we go"
. . .
"We'll be french-fried potatos bye and bye" -- Tom Lehrer
Mark˛
That, and finding a white card to shoot a custom white balance from...
Most will be rather "darkened" by then.
Bob Harrington
news:g3ch12t1e4qjufhc9...@4ax.com:
It's Bush' fault - Stop Solar Warming Now!
D'ja hear Haliburton is going to buy all those seaport terminal operations
from Dubai Ports World?
Ron Hunter
Confusion appreciates confusion. Now it will be ages before the
misconceptions, and misled will be cleared up. Great humor? I think
not, and it isn't even April 1 yet. sigh.
ASAAR
> Just in case no one here is working in the real life commercial or
> museum world, The Wilhelm institute has no credibility except in the
> land of the digitally lost... advertising... and wishful thinking.
I take it that you're anti-Wilhelm Institute bias does not apply
to Henry Wilhelm, one time assistant to Ansel Adams, holder of
patents for archival print washers, holder of a Guggenheim
Fellowship for the study of color print fading and more recently
consultant for collecting institutions such as the Museum of Modern
Art and Bill Gates' Corbis, where he advises on the long term
preservation of the Corbis Bettman photography collections? If your
bias extends to both, then perhaps your moniker is an example of
truth in advertising. <g>
ASAAR
> Keep in mind that any discussion about what will and will not be
> usable in 100 years is pure speculation, regardless the amount of
> scientific mumgo-jumbo used to back up an argument about the future.
>
> (not arguing with whomever I responded to.. just pointing out an often
> overlooked fact and obvious factor in these discussions. What makes
> good future-fodder for Sutterbug today is often pure bs. Anyone one
> with common sense will upgrade their data files with each major step
> forward in media development. Easy and simple...stupid to ignore.)
Another whooshing sound, as last heard in the jpg thread?
Zorba the Geek
news:GMGdnfE3QZj...@giganews.com...
far, only light hearted joviality which the vast majority seem quite capable
of appreciating. I doubt very much if anyone with the necessary technical
prowess that's required to own and maintain a PC, connect to the internet
and participate in newsgroups, is likely to fall for such a blatantly
obvious comical post.
Or perhaps those that complain doth troll too much.
All Things Mopar
hand
> "All Things Mopar" <nuno...@beez.wax> wrote in message
another elitist pig with no-thing to contribute except an
example of their small brain. Plonk!
All Things Mopar
Come on around with your rice burner, Dave. My car is a
hybrid - it burns gas and rubber. And, Toyotas. For them less
gifted than you, why don't you tell us all about what you have
under the hood, other than stale rice. I have yet to lose a
street race to anything with the smell of jap sweat, so dream
on, asshole,
--
ATM, aka Jerry
"Whether You Think You CAN Or CAN'T, You're Right." – Henry
Ford
All Things Mopar
You have never answered any of my questions, nor anyone elses.
You are just another elitist, legend-in-their-own mind
"expert" that likes to take people on for some sort of
perverted pleasure. As for April Fool, look in the mirror
asssssaaaarrr, the biggest fool is looking back at you.
Cuz
|| Today cjcampbell commented courteously on the subject at hand
||
||| Most people are surprised to discover that JPG photos have
||| such a short shelf life. You can slow the process down
||| somewhat by re-copying them every three months, but
||| eventually they will fade to almost nothing anyway.
|||
||| emanating from your computer monitor and other peripherals
||| -- even your disk drive -- and cosmic rays coming from the
||| sun.
||
|| Where did you get such utter nonsense, the back of the cereal
|| box? My JPEGs from 198x are still OK, as are later JPEG scans
|| into the present day, ditto for /all/ my digitals since 2001.
|| Absolutely 100% OK in everyway.
||
|| After your opening paragraphs, I stopped reading. Can't be
|| anything here that is even remotely correct. Don't bother
|| replying, you'll be talking to the air, troll.
||
Loved your satirical response Mopar... :-)
Cuz
|| Today Zorba the Geek commented courteously on the subject at
|| hand
||
||| "All Things Mopar" <nuno...@beez.wax> wrote in message
||| news:Xns97874932...@216.196.97.131...
||||
|||| Actually, the number of morons is quite small, so I don't
|||| feel lonely at all. And, I doubt I'll miss you - plonk!
||||
||||
||| So small you're virtually insignificant.
|||
|| another elitist pig with no-thing to contribute except an
|| example of their small brain. Plonk!
||
Beats the hell out of being an idiot....
Cuz
Zorba the Geek
> Today Zorba the Geek commented courteously on the subject at
> hand
>
>> "All Things Mopar" <nuno...@beez.wax> wrote in message
>> news:Xns97874932...@216.196.97.131...
>>>
>>> Actually, the number of morons is quite small, so I don't
>>> feel lonely at all. And, I doubt I'll miss you - plonk!
>>>
>>>
>> So small you're virtually insignificant.
>>
> another elitist pig with no-thing to contribute except an
> example of their small brain. Plonk!
>
>
ASAAR
>> You haven't missed nearly as many as the hmorless Mopar
>> mega-plonker. He also gets extremely perturbed by people
>> that try to answer his questions but don't do it in the
>> manner his insists upon. I think in this case the outrage
>> is feigned. After having posted so many messages going far
>> deeper into the intricacies of digital images than most
>> people here ever consider (not to mention his recent posts
>> implying extensive computer knowledge by detailing how he
>> performs backups and backups and backups ad infinitum) he
>> must have been quite embarrassed to have been so easily
>> taken in by April Fool type humor that wouldn't have gotten
>> past the average novice. Now I'm left eagerly awaiting
>> another of his plonks. They tend to fade faster than JPGs,
>> you know. :)
>
> You have never answered any of my questions, nor anyone elses.
> You are just another elitist, legend-in-their-own mind
> "expert" that likes to take people on for some sort of
> perverted pleasure. As for April Fool, look in the mirror
> asssssaaaarrr, the biggest fool is looking back at you.
BZZZZT!!! - Wrong, muffler breath. [ apologies to Johnny & Ed ]
I have posted some answers, but they, as well as most answers from
others were not what you wanted to hear. As for your insults,
they're pretty pitiful, especially from a geezer like you. Most
kiddies outgrow such childish retorts by their teen years. One is
bound to wonder if perhaps you're regressing.
Bill Funk
wrote:
>Confusion appreciates confusion. Now it will be ages before the
>misconceptions, and misled will be cleared up. Great humor? I think
>not, and it isn't even April 1 yet. sigh.
Do you really, honestly think people will read this:
"So, if you want JPEG pictures that last a long time, follow these
simple rules:
1) Use a pocket camera with a tiny sensor.
2) Use the highest compression possible.
3) Use the smallest picture size available for your camera.
4) Store it on the smallest memory card available.
5) Make sure there is only one copy."
and take it seriously?
If so, maybe you need to get out more, and meet new people?
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
Bill Funk
<nuno...@beez.wax> wrote:
>another elitist pig with no-thing to contribute except an
>example of their small brain. Plonk!
For someone who contributes as little as you do, you sure plonk a lot.
Bill Funk
<nuno...@beez.wax> wrote:
>Come on around with your rice burner, Dave. My car is a
>hybrid - it burns gas and rubber. And, Toyotas. For them less
>gifted than you, why don't you tell us all about what you have
>under the hood, other than stale rice. I have yet to lose a
>street race to anything with the smell of jap sweat, so dream
>on, asshole,
Ah! You're a street racer, too!
Why am I not surprised.