Digital BW, The Print

Sorry Austin but you seem like someone with a special axe to grind here. I agree that we ALL must take a wait n' see attitude towards any new 
technology that is being touted as 'revolutionary' but your comments go a bit too far overboard to be taken seriously or without suspicion. Your 
comments are just too full of red flags that raise my level of suspicion about your true motives here.

I'm not sure why YOU expect to get a personal reply from a major company when you demand to know exactly what camera took which photos.  I 
have a hunch that unless you contacted just the right person, most employees probably don't have any idea which camera was used. Not that they 
are trying to deliberately hide the fact, just that they don't know. Further more, unless you are the editor for some well respected publication, I doubt 
they would even put too much effort into finding out for you.  If you approached them with even half the tone I read in this post, my guess is that you 
were dismissed as some crackpot without much further thought.

As for your 25 plus years of experience with digital imaging?  I bet that is a bit of a stretch. Maybe 25 years with computers or digital technology in 
general but I somehow doubt you have been doing digital imaging for 25 years. Geez, that pre-dates most solid state computers as we know them.  
Were you using tubes and relays?

We all know that marketing types stretch the facts. They manipulate them to make sure their product is presented in the best light possible. Many 
will stretch the facts as far as they think they can get away with before being held legally liable. This is a known fact. It's our job as consumers to 
sort through these layers of BS. But to start throwing around accusations such as "bogus" and "lying" is a bit too much of a stretch. IMHO maybe 
even bordering on the edge of legal accountability yourself.

Greg



> Well, of course they do (and note the caveat..."for the price")!  For
> some reason, unbeknownst to me, people WANT this thing to be some
> godsend...even without testing the real thing...or comparing the
> results to either film or a REAL digital camera...they just like the
> IDEA of it, and want to somehow toot some horn...any horn and claim to
> be part of the "revolution"!  It really is simply amazing (and
> inordinately humorous) to watch!
> 
> Even Foveon is SO confident in their new "invention", the test images
> they show on their web site are entirely BOGUS.  The problems they
> bring up are 10 years old, and have been long solved, and do NOT exist
> in current cameras.  They also, even though I asked, refuse to provide
> any information on what camera those images came from that they use
> for comparison!  And you expect me to take them seriously when they
> provide bogus information like this?  Serious (and honest) scientists
> ALWAYS provide full disclosure of their test methodology, equipment
> and results.
> 
> > This sounds like a lot more than "just a 20 or 30 percent
> > improvement, which wouldn't even be worthy of anything more than a
> > footnote in a review.
> 
> Yes, "sounds" is ALWAYS a good place to start when judging image
> quality. Something about a blind man describing an elephant comes to
> mind ;-)
> 
> See what I mean?  Even YOU want to believe these completely
> unsubstantiated claims!  Now don't get me wrong, this sensor MAY be
> decent...but we do NOT know!  It has NEVER been subjected to
> scientific testing of results and procedure with current cameras or
> film, period!  NO valid conclusion can be drawn until...and until,
> it's purely wishful thinking!
> 
> > These reviews make it quite clear that this is a real
> > revolution in technology.
> 
> And these people know because....  I've been IN the digital imaging
> industry for over 25 years...  It's a STEP, but NOT a revolution. 
> Foveon did not invent the idea of 3d sensors, or using three sensors
> per pixel.  That is a standard issue concept that has been around for
> as long as I've been designing this stuff.
> 
> > If they are lying, I wouldn't want to be one of
> > their stockholders.
> 
> If who is lying?  Foveon isn't lying, as far as I can tell, but they
> are, in my opinion, misleading (as I stated above) AND they are, as
> any thing of this nature does, exaggerating and hyping.  Do you really
> expect any less? Every time someone farts in this industry, it's a
> "revolution".  Cripes, where were you during the .snot "revolution"? 
> Still licking your wounds? ;-)
> 
> > We'll just have to wait for the test reports...
> 
> Exactly what I've been saying!  But the tests HAVE to be scientific
> AND honest.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Austin
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ---------------------~--> Access Your PC from Anywhere It's Easy. It's
> Fast. - Free Download
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/AxtVhB/6XkDAA/_ZuFAA/ucIolB/TM
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------~
> ->
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
> keep them short. - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change
> the subject header. - Good manners are required at all time. No
> personal attacks or "flames." - Complete your Yahoo profile. - Before
> posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
>