Digital BW, The Print

In a message dated 1/1/2004 2:38:01 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com writes:
All?  Possible?  That's simply not true.  There are no gallium arsenide
computer chips in %99.9999999 of modern computers, these chips (processor,
memory, chipsets etc.) are silicon based.
You missed the comma I placed between arsenide and VLSI. Most of the large 
scale integration today is in CMOS, as are the Foveon sensors.

As to overstating his accomplshments, Carver received the coveted Lemelson 
prize from MIT in 1999, the year I met him. So there's a half million reasons 
why I disagree with your opinion on my "overstatment of his accomplishments."

http://web.mit.edu/invent/a-winners/a-mead.html

As to my co-incidental mention of the X3 development, I had read about the 
depth properties of silicon in some Kodak white papers some years ago. I 
mentioned the idea in some my daily Emails, which went unanswered for some time. They 
later told me that I had caused them to have a meeting about a "possible 
leak" since they were concurrently working on the patents and aquiring other 
patents on this idea, hence the word "co-incidental." There's a big difference 
between words in an Email and committing $50 million in R&D, so I have no 
pretenses about any contributions. However, Foveon's chief engineer did admit to my 
idea being "prescient" in later correspondences.  I'm no Dick Merrill, brilliant 
analog chip designer, I'm just a owrking photographer with a former 
electronics background. I'm not trying to overimpress anyone, I just sell prints for a 
living in the portrait market.

I still think that by way of the "no color filter or fuzzy filter" approach 
to the SD-9 and the new improved SD-10 makes for sharper images in color and 
B&W than their Bayer/AA filtered counterparts. Opinions, pro and con, are well 
and good, but I have files and made prints with Carbons and Pigments from all 
current cameras.

I have owned all of them and made sold prints from all of them. I am not a 
theorist, I'm a doer. Light control, composition, and marketing are far more 
important than recording and scanning devices. The most important of all is 
making out bank deposit slips. The least important is being an argumentative 
technical elitist.

Claude


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Claude,

> All?  Possible?  That's simply not true.  There are no gallium arsenide
> computer chips in %99.9999999 of modern computers, these chips (processor,
> memory, chipsets etc.) are silicon based.
> You missed the comma I placed between arsenide and VLSI. Most of
> the large
> scale integration today is in CMOS, as are the Foveon sensors.

But Carver Mead did NOT "invent" VLSI.  It's simply a name, there is nothing
to invent.  So what if most LSI chips are CMOS, Mead didn't have anything to
do with CMOS.

> As to overstating his accomplshments, Carver received the coveted
> Lemelson
> prize from MIT in 1999,

That's actually kind of funny that Mead would get a "Lemelson Prize".  I'd
suggest you do some research into who Lemelson was, and what he did.  But,
none the less...

> the year I met him. So there's a half
> million reasons
> why I disagree with your opinion on my "overstatment of his
> accomplishments."

Receiving an award does not in any way show that all your claims of Mead's
accomplishments were true, as they simply were not.  It shows he received an
award.  He IS a very bright guy, and he has made very good contributions to
technology, no doubt.

> As to my co-incidental mention of the X3 development, I had read
> about the
> depth properties of silicon in some Kodak white papers some years ago. I
> mentioned the idea in some my daily Emails, which went unanswered
> for some time. They
> later told me that I had caused them to have a meeting about a "possible
> leak" since they were concurrently working on the patents and
> aquiring other
> patents on this idea, hence the word "co-incidental." There's a
> big difference
> between words in an Email and committing $50 million in R&D, so I have no
> pretenses about any contributions. However, Foveon's chief
> engineer did admit to my
> idea being "prescient" in later correspondences.

OK, if you say so ;-)

> I'm just a owrking photographer with a former
> electronics background. I'm not trying to overimpress anyone, I
> just sell prints for a
> living in the portrait market.

Then why the sycophantic demur about Mead?  It's kind of weird, in fact.

> I still think that by way of the "no color filter or fuzzy
> filter" approach
> to the SD-9 and the new improved SD-10 makes for sharper images
> in color and
> B&W than their Bayer/AA filtered counterparts.

The sensor type (stacked vs mosaic) has not a single thing to do with
sharpness, it has to do with color fidelity, which are two separate things.

> I have owned all of them and made sold prints from all of them. I
> am not a
> theorist, I'm a doer. Light control, composition, and marketing
> are far more
> important than recording and scanning devices. The most important
> of all is
> making out bank deposit slips. The least important is being an
> argumentative
> technical elitist.

I'm not a technical elitist at all, just someone who has been designing
digital imaging systems for over 25 years, and knows first hand with some
reasonably high degree of certainty, through thousands of hours of
experimentation and first hand experience, what is true, and what isn't.

For some reason, some people *need* to overstate the capabilities of digital
cameras (wasn't it you who made some claim about a digital P&S being better
than any film camera in another group?), and it seems more so about the
Foveon.  It's like people *want* it to be more than it is...  It is what it
is, and if it works great for you, that's great (and all that should matter
to you).

Regards,

Austin

This thread is off the topic for this group, digital B&W printing. Please
end off or take the discussion off-list.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Group Moderators



"Users who repeatedly make off topic posts may have their ability to post
restricted or their membership terminated at the discretion of the group
Owner and/or Moderators. By participating in this forum users agree that
what constitutes an off topic post is solely at the discretion of the group
Owner and/or Moderators This may sound harsh but from experience it is
essential to maintaining a high quality and useful forum."

Bravo Group Moderators!
Joe D.


--- Martin Wesley <mwesley250@...> wrote:

---------------------------------
This thread is off the topic for this group, digital
B&W printing. Please
end off or take the discussion off-list.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Group Moderators

Does the QuadTone RIP support the 7600?

Thanks,
Stan

================================
Photography by Stan McQueen
http://www.smcqueen.com

Yes.
http://www.harrington.com/QuadToneRIP.html

On Sunday, January 4, 2004, at 10:26  AM, Stan McQueen wrote:

> Does the QuadTone RIP support the 7600?
>
> Thanks,
> Stan

Thanks for the info. Now for another question:

I have QTR beta 9 installed (on Redhat) and driving my 2200. It looks 
great. When I look in the Quadtone directories, I find a PPD file for the 
7600 but no curve files. Will I need to create new curve files for the 7600 
or can I rename the 2200 files and use them?

Thanks,
Stan

At 08:45 AM 1/4/2004, Carl Schofield wrote:
>Yes.
>http://www.harrington.com/QuadToneRIP.html
>
>On Sunday, January 4, 2004, at 10:26  AM, Stan McQueen wrote:
>
> > Does the QuadTone RIP support the 7600?

================================
Photography by Stan McQueen
http://www.smcqueen.com

You will need to change the following:

PRINTER=QUAD7600_on_192_168_1_100 (or whatever your 7600 name is)
DEFAULT_INK_LIMIT=50
LIMIT_LK=40
GRAY_INK_2=LK
GRAY_VAL_2=35

and then you will need to linearize to match your printer.
You can try the following as a start:

LINEARIZE="0.044 0.083 0.137 0.205 0.279 0.353 0.439 0.530 0.618 0.707 0.786 0.
870 0.943 1.015 1.088 1.149 1.226 1.289 1.345 1.384 1.410 "

email me if you need to chat -- I'm still fine tuning my own profiles.

mjs




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Stan McQueen <stan@s...> 
wrote:

> Thanks for the info. Now for another question:
> 
> I have QTR beta 9 installed (on Redhat) and driving my 2200. It looks 
> great. When I look in the Quadtone directories, I find a PPD file for the 
> 7600 but no curve files. Will I need to create new curve files for the 7600 
> or can I rename the 2200 files and use them?
> 
> Thanks,
> Stan
> 
> At 08:45 AM 1/4/2004, Carl Schofield wrote:
> >Yes.
> >http://www.harrington.com/QuadToneRIP.html
> >
> >On Sunday, January 4, 2004, at 10:26  AM, Stan McQueen wrote:
> >
> > > Does the QuadTone RIP support the 7600?
> 
> ================================
> Photography by Stan McQueen
> http://www.smcqueen.com

At 09:00 PM 1/5/2004, you wrote:
>You will need to change the following:
>
>PRINTER=QUAD7600_on_192_168_1_100 (or whatever your 7600 name is)
>DEFAULT_INK_LIMIT=50
>LIMIT_LK=40
>GRAY_INK_2=LK
>GRAY_VAL_2=35
>
>and then you will need to linearize to match your printer.
>You can try the following as a start:
>
>LINEARIZE="0.044 0.083 0.137 0.205 0.279 0.353 0.439 0.530 0.618 0.707 
>0.786 0.
>870 0.943 1.015 1.088 1.149 1.226 1.289 1.345 1.384 1.410 "
>
>email me if you need to chat -- I'm still fine tuning my own profiles.
>
>mjs

Thanks very much. I'm still deciding whether to buy a 7600. One obstacle 
was being able to print B&W without having to buy a RIP that costs as much 
as the printer. That seems to have been overcome now by knowing that QTR 
supports it. If I do buy one, I'll undoubtedly be asking more questions.

Thanks,
Stan

================================
Photography by Stan McQueen
http://www.smcqueen.com