Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!acorn!abccam!pete
From: pete@abccam.abcl.co.uk (Peter Cockerell)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Photo CD
Message-ID: <645@pete.abccam.abcl.co.uk>
Date: 3 Dec 90 12:56:59 GMT
Organization: Active Book Company Limited, Cambridge, UK
Lines: 24


What's the word on Kodak's Photo CD then? It's obviously designed as a
bit of a (Canon et al) still video killer, but is it really high enough
quality? I've heard the scanner that converts the 35mm negs to digitised
images is 2048 elements wide.  If this is along the 36mm edge of the
neg, it only amounts to 57 pixels/mm.  Even along the 24mm edge, you
only get 85 pixels/mm.  This doesn't sound very high compared to the
highest resolution film (isn't Ektar 25 ASA supposed to be about 150
lines/mm?)

What's the colour resolution? I gather an uncompressed image is about
18Mb, so at 2048*3072 (being optimistic) pixels we get 24 bits/pixel,
which is fine.  But the compression ratio is 3:1, so how badly does this
affect the colour resolution? Or is it spatial resolution that suffers,
or both?

What capabilities will be offered by the Photo CD player? Will there be
real-time panning and zooming of the images (shades of Blade Runner)?
What about hard copy? Will there be affordable colour printers that give
as good results as chemical processes by the launch in two years' time?

Any informed opinions welcome... 

Pete XXX


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com