I use the same brand

Post #417,837 by drook 4/22/17 6:54:23 AM 4/22/17 6:54:23 AM Reply	I use the same brand I once wore the same pair of glasses for 15 years or so. I've been through ... 6 maybe? ... phones since I started carrying one in the early noughts and never had screen damage. The charger port connection got flaky on my Galaxy S3, but other than that I've gotten everything through the entire contract. The last two - the Galaxy and the current Nexus 6P - had cases because the "ergonomic hand feel" is slippery as shit. * Occasionally someone would convince me to go get my eyes checked because "your prescription always changes over time." I've never understood why people with 20/20 vision expect it to stay that way, but those of us who need glasses expect it to keep changing. -- Drew
Post #417,838 by pwhysall 4/22/17 7:36:44 AM 4/22/17 7:36:44 AM Reply	Six? Amateur This list starts in early 2000: Comments are from an old post on another forum, and (especially for the older phones) need to be read as applying at the time I had the phone in question. In retrospect, most of these phones are awful. Motorola L7089: Didn't know jack about phones at the time, I just liked the reflective display. This phone did sterling service with my mum for about 8 years after this. Nokia 3310: It worked, but for some reason I thought it was a bit girly. Siemens C35i: Annoying adverts. Weird little phone. Incredibly robust. Sagem MyX-5: colour! It had TEH INTERNET! French. Orange SPV E100: Oh dear. An early Windows phone. This was never going to be all that good. It wasn't. Sony Ericsson K700i: Very, very good at the time. Brilliant display and the smartest-looking interface I'd ever seen. Sony Ericsson P910: Excellent smartphone. Miss this, although I don't miss the fact that it was roughly the size and weight of Sedna. Nokia 6710: Interesting design, brilliant big keypad. Oddly unsatisfying to use. Samsung D500: Unfeasibly bright screen. Idiosyncratic interface, but usable. Very good slider mechanism. Rubber strip across the bottom of the screen meant avoiding the "thumbprint on the screen" problem that most sliders have. Orange SPV M600: I don't appear to be a fast learner. Windows remains the only mobile operating system to have crashed on me during a call. Sony Ericsson T610i: Beautiful little phone; I bought this off eBay, simply because of what it looked like. Sadly, the low screen resolution meant that I couldn't live with it. Nokia 6310i: Off eBay, rockin' it old school. Brilliant, brilliant phone. Naturally, I sold it. )facepalm( Nokia 6300: Bloody ace. The thing that lets it down is the battery life, which is, frankly, pish. But hey. It's a great phone. Sony Ericsson W910i: Great phone, good screen, excellent software (on the phone, not on the PC: S-E's PC stuff was, is and remains a stinking pile of fetid dingo's kidneys) but the build quality meant that within a couple of months, the phone looked a couple of years old. Slider not up to Samsung standards, either. Apple iPhone 3G: Build quality beyond reproach, screen vast and bright. Some niggles around the call list (it's primitive compared to the lists on Nokia and S-E phones) and the speed of the interface, though. Mobile web browsing finally usable for me. Oh, and Bejeweled 2. Timethief. Nokia 6310i: Bought another one, because I periodically go all nostalgic. BlackBerry Storm2: Inexplicable choice. Terrible. Returned to Vodafone in exchange for a... BlackBerry Bold 9700: Probably the best BlackBerry ever made. Would be horrific now. Google Nexus One: The driftiest clock that ever drifted. My first encounter with Android, and my first encounter with a pentile AMOLED screen. HTC 7 Mozart: The start of my excursion into Windows Phone. Nice handset, tbh. Nokia Lumia 800: Blue. Good screen. Excellent build quality and design. Nokia Lumia 920: Getting bigger now. Yellow. better screen. Nokia Lumia 1020: 41 megapixel camera. Shoots RAW. Weird design, good screen. Unfortunately, Windows Phone started to hit the skids as a consumer platform here. iPhone 6S+: Great phone. Slippy design. Camera promised more than it delivered. Samsung Galaxy S8+: Astonishing screen. Better than the iPhone in every way that matters. Astonishing screen.
Post #417,839 by drook 4/22/17 8:47:29 AM 4/22/17 8:47:29 AM Reply	Geez, now I want to try to remember mine First device I carried was a two-way text pager. God only knows the brand. Work issued. Next was a Nokia candybar, something like the 6510 (though I don't think that was quite it). Next was a little flip, likely the Motorola V551. Then the first one I'm pretty sure of the model was the Blackberry 8310. Still love the physical keyboard on that one, and the trackball was surprisingly effective. I can't remember the next, but I'm pretty sure I had another flip between the BB and my first smartphone, which was ... Samsung Galaxy S3. Brilliant screen, even though you couldn't see it in sunlight. And the camera is surprisingly good. Battery can't make it a full day though. When the charger port became to flaky to live with, I switched to the current ... Nexus 6P. Another good screen, and even better camera. The camera app is a significant improvement. And I can go a whole day without charging again. -- Drew
Post #417,885 by static 4/25/17 6:35:29 AM 4/25/17 6:35:29 AM Reply	Now you've tempted me... My first mobile phone was an Ericsson GH388. Very good for its day. Also surprisingly tough. I think my second was the phone addon widget to the Handspring Visor. Great idea, but a little ahead of its time and it showed. Next was a Sony Ericsson T300 or maybe a T310. Came with a plugin camera which was a little bit shit. My first experience with Sony's "feature phone" OS which I quite liked, but the hardware was quite low in the range. Never bought something so low-end again. Also the only phone I bought a ringtone for - the Danger Mouse themetune. Then I got a SE K610. Now that was a good phone! Outstanding Bluetooth stack, for one thing. I used to use the Bluetooth "modem" interface from my work laptop (running Linux!) to get onto the Internet. Also used to use it transfer files to and from it which was much more flexible than the cable. I used the K610 until it wore out. My next was a G900, which took some searching for as I didn't realize it had gone out of production until long after I bought it. Not as good as the K610. By the time it had started developing a hardware fault, the first Android phones were on sale. My first Android phone was a HTC Hero running Android 1.5. Not a bad little phone - the major thing I was annoyed with was the shockingly immature Bluetooth stack. Oh and the camera lens would not stay clean. But it was the first phone I had with a decent file interface over the cable. Next were two more HTC Android phones that were obviously not memorable at all. Other than I know there were two of them. I started getting tired of HTC's skinning of Android. Lastly, my current phone: Sony Xperia Z. Superb. 4 or 5 years old and still going fairly strong - I think the battery is starting to show its age. Best camera so far. Also largest I've ever owned. Sony have pushed out two major Android versions to it, but scuttlebutt is that there won't be anymore for such an old platform. Wade.
Post #417,840 by pwhysall 4/22/17 8:56:09 AM 4/22/17 8:56:09 AM Reply	Look how I thought the iPhone 3G's screen was "vast and bright" :D iPhone 3G: 480x320, 3.5" Current phone: 2960x1440, 6.2"
Post #417,854 by Ashton 4/23/17 3:24:13 AM 4/23/17 3:24:13 AM Reply	I've a somewhat lengthier view of er, Bitchin resolution (but with similar retrospectives.) Possibly the (incipient..?) geezers amongst us can verify the Gold Standard for our fledgling intro to what is now called--all digitally-enhanced--high rez stuff, now on scales of n-giga-pixels and related cha. cha. (not quite the last cha.) Kodachrome! that dye-based er, pixel-less magick base for all those 'slides' (now residing in ..boxen of all sizes, in attics?) I have some of the Grand Euro tour in Leitz-Pradovit carriers. (One of those shows moi playing one of those Euro rotary-valve trumpets: handed me! from a window on a basement room (by a trusting soul) where I had heard Sounds, this in Salzburg aka Mozartiana.) (My) Story: Recall the first Trinitron boob-tubes. All dsiplays, natch, had to be watched at a decent distance such that the little [__] blocks faded into inconsequence, but then these subjectively seemed a better comparo with a projected K. color-positive-slide. When a new 5-INCH-tiny model arrived, (capable also-too of running on IIRC 18V DC?) well you can see the possibilities. I snared one at wholesale but still ~$300 when that was real-money. 'Twas a More-better K-chrome approximation. (Bartered off, earlier ... about ten years back I snagged another pristine one for a ridiculous price (~$25) at a local computer store. [Such a Deal] Now, of course, the phones with high pixel-count eclipse most everything, although I know not of any measured comparos with some K-slides exposed/developed by qualified Photographers, as might demonstrate the true-limits as each of us Looks. Subjectively. with our own eyeballs. Anyway, that's my take on subjective-resolution and I'm sticking with it.
Post #417,855 by pwhysall 4/23/17 4:50:18 AM 4/23/17 4:50:18 AM Reply	S8+ display is 529dpi. Good film is ~5000dpi. But remember that those 5000 dots per inch are all you've got - they've got to provide all the detail, whether you print at A4 or A00. This equates to ~20MP - so, my full-frame Canon 6D is very (very) roughly equivalent to film, although it's better or worse or the same, depending on the film and the ISO and other stuff too. Now, there are DSLRs with 35mm sensors that have 30 and even 50 MP resolutions - these are pointless for regular printing and viewing, but they're ideal for product photography (where noise is simply not allowed), for printing really, REALLY big, or simply for giving the photographer the freedom to crop, thus potentially turning a modest (and therefore practical) zoom lens into a cheap and cheerful version of a much longer lens. Phone and some laptop (i.e. the high-DPI/Retina) displays are now able to resolve detail better than most printers, which tend to top out at a practical limit of 600DPI for monochrome and a lot less than that for colour.
Post #417,856 by Ashton 4/23/17 7:13:54 AM 4/23/17 7:13:54 AM Reply	Thanks much, all good points (and with numbers used exactly where they matter.) Point taken too, where huge enlargements will be wanted, though I always have trouble intermingling aims of AD-bizness -vs- Art Sweet and undefinable Like the pineapple --line from a Piet Hein Grook, that. I retain still a box of K-slides I took of *Ansel Adams, while doing his work: much of the set-up and other details handled by an able assistant.) But considering (say) a Venn diagram where the physics details have an overlay and then: the several published versions of Ansel's meticulous use of a spot-photometer (not to mention his enlarger/dodging in production of actual B&W prints, one at a time.. I daresay that the entire ingredients of a finished Art-work by cohorts of this calibre, just can't possible be reduced to ... that (drat!) algorithm idea. Impressive as the new techno is (and its numbers, where they count) I'm betting that his iconic photos (moon over El Capitan for ex.) might or might not be amenable to 'improvement'--even were he still around--had he the option. (But that is a w.a.g. from me; I recognize enough of the qualities of an able Photographer to recognize what I lack,) confessing that a very few 'shots' of them all: might qualify as real Photographs, via the luck of the conditions and maybe having pressed the shutter at the right Instant. (When you can do that-all with regularity ... you're a better man than I, Gunga Din.) * I still haven't figured out the best thing to do with these slides; clearly they should end up with an absolute AA-focussed collector out there: one who might glean something from the work-while-in-progress, quite more than "via my camera angles" while necessarily staying out of the way (Nikon prior to the F2.) No worries though; as Mr. Micawber was wont to say, >Something will turn up..
Post #417,857 by drook 4/23/17 10:02:02 AM 4/23/17 10:02:02 AM Reply	Re: pressing the shutter at the right instant http://m.imgur.com/gallery/FOogB As for your collection, if you found a method to scan a representative half-dozen I'll bet Peter could put those up on a few special-interest sites that would get you plenty of interest in taking them off your hands. -- Drew
Post #417,868 by Ashton 4/24/17 2:33:03 AM 4/24/17 2:33:03 AM Reply	Good thoughts, thanks. Would have to find a decent quality slide copying device to borrow/rent, of the sort whose color temp, etc. are malleable but also calibrated (to something.) It's possible. As to 720,000 pix to get to That spectacular bird shot11 well.. it sounds more like obsession than ..dedication. Can't spare the heart beats! Apropos I think: a recent factoid claimed (heard en passant) That the fewer number of heartbeats/min of a critter (incl. US) ... the longer the life. Cited was an elephant and a few others: best guesstimate was: ya gets about 1.5 billion heartbeats! Fascinating enough theory that I hope it receives further close attention.
Post #417,869 by drook 4/24/17 2:38:38 AM 4/24/17 2:38:38 AM Reply	I've heard the heartbeat theory ... Don't like it Reminds me of the scene in Amadeus where he's told that the ear can only hear so many notes in an evening, and his Opera had too many. -- Drew
Post #417,870 by pwhysall 4/24/17 3:38:27 AM 4/24/17 3:39:48 AM Reply	Don't contemplate doing it yourself Negative/slide scanning is a surprisingly tricksy business, and it's remarkable what can be achieved with a professional-grade drum scanner by a skilled operator. Conversely, it's remarkable what a pile of bullshit can be achieved - even with expensive gear - by someone who's not. tl;dr: pay someone to do it for you. Edited by pwhysall April 24, 2017, 03:39:48 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #417,906 by Ashton 4/25/17 7:52:18 PM 4/25/17 7:52:18 PM Reply	Thou sayest and, shall seek such a One via the magick of (hell, Google or Other) You're quite right; I may comprehend the basics re the Numbers but as you remind, none of that much matters where the Lore is indispensable to ... Doin it Rihgt.
Post #417,841 by malraux 4/22/17 11:02:16 AM 4/22/17 11:02:16 AM Reply	5 A something-something who knows been too damn long feature phone A Sony Ericsson W600i swivel phone (the first with a Walkman built in): A Blackberry something-or-other (still upstairs in a drawer for when one of the kids breaks their phone again) An iPhone 4S An iPhone 6S I had to replace the screen on the 6S once because I had a shitty case on it and dropped it corner-first on some tile, oops. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #417,865 by a6l6e6x 4/23/17 11:20:30 PM 4/23/17 11:20:30 PM Reply	Wow, that list will delay your retirement! :) Alex "There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." -- Isaac Asimov
Post #417,866 by pwhysall 4/24/17 12:35:07 AM 4/24/17 12:35:07 AM Reply	What you guys get to spend on healthcare, I get to spend on gadgets

Welcome to IWETHEY!