#Mineral database
5 messages in this thread
Doug,
At the FM Symposium in Tacoma,WA last September, George gave a demo of it. And
stated that it was essentially designed, just needed to get all the photos
(various collectors including Low Perloff and Wendell Wilson had offered to
donate photos) and put it together. No hint on how long that might take or what
the cost would be.
Lanny
Hi, Lanny–
I have just been reading of a camera (an Apple Quick<something>) that takes
pictures not on film but straight into digital memory in the camera, intended
for easy download into a computer. It lists for near $700, but sure would be
handy for building this sort of mineral imagebase. In its higher resolution
mode, still short of conventional photo resolution, each pic needs 1 meg, and
the camera can only hold 8 of these.
–Doug
Doug,
That's the Apple QuickTake 100, 24bit color, 8 images or 1/4 the resolution and
get 32 photos. Sure wish I had one to take to Tucson!
Lanny
Doug,
As I understand these electronic cameras (e-cameras ?), you can transfer the
image files to your hard drive or syquest or whatever for storage, so the size
of the files is not a big deal–until you try to integrate them into an image
base.
Nathan
Hi, Nathan–
That notion of folding images into a database is what caused me to react to
their size – that would be my primary intent in getting one of these cameras.
And to keep lots of photos would want lots of diskettes (as if I did not
already have many hundreds…). The day I _must_ have (instead of merely
panting for) a removable hard drive draws ever closer.
That 8 pix in the camera limit could be quite annoying to a traveler with no
laptop computer handy.
–Doug