Searching \ for '[PIC]: Poptronics no more :-(' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/devices.htm?key=pic
Search entire site for: 'Poptronics no more :-('.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC]: Poptronics no more :-('
2003\02\26@035009 by Charles Craft

picon face
I stumbled across the Poptronics info when looking for Ant8 reviews. A shame since they always had plenty of entry level PIC projects.


http://www.eedesign.com/columns/max_bytes/OEG20030203S0078

http://www.poptronics.com/html/subscribe.html

We are no longer accepting subscriptions.

Unfortunately, we will no longer be able to accept subscriptions. Gernsback Publications, Inc. is discontinuing publication of Poptronics magazine, effective immediately.
For current subscribers, we are working to place fulfillment of your subscription with a comparable publication. You should receive notification, as soon as an agreement is reached.

We are sorry for any inconvenience this will likely cause.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\26@120941 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
> I stumbled across the Poptronics info when looking for Ant8
> reviews. A shame since they always had plenty of entry level PIC projects.
>
>
> http://www.eedesign.com/columns/max_bytes/OEG20030203S0078
>
> http://www.poptronics.com/html/subscribe.html
>
> We are no longer accepting subscriptions.
>
> Unfortunately, we will no longer be able to accept subscriptions.
> Gernsback Publications, Inc. is discontinuing publication of
> Poptronics magazine, effective immediately.
> For current subscribers, we are working to place fulfillment of
> your subscription with a comparable publication. You should
> receive notification, as soon as an agreement is reached.
>
> We are sorry for any inconvenience this will likely cause.

       Yes, quite sad. I've been a subscriber of there's for nearly a decade (with
Electronics Now before they combined Popular Electronics and Electronics Now
into Poptronics). I only found out when I enquired as to why I can't
received my last couple issues. The "comparable" magazine is Nuts and Volts.
I'm not sure how good they are, I've never seen a paper copy here in Canada.
TTYL

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\26@122008 by SavanaPics

picon face
In my opinion, you will be happy with Nuts and Volts magazine.  They are very
informative, have a variety of microprocessor projects, and good technical
articles.  I have been buying it for several years.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\26@135034 by Philip Pemberton

face picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:
> received my last couple issues. The "comparable" magazine is Nuts and
> Volts.
> I'm not sure how good they are, I've never seen a paper copy here in
> Canada.
I've never seen N&V either. I tried to get a copy over here (I'm in rainy
ol' England) and was told that it would take three months and cost £8 to
import *just one* issue. Cute. I personally read Elektor
(http://www.elektor-electronics.co.uk) and "Everyday Practical Electronics"
(http://www.epemag.wimborne.co.uk). Elektor have an annoying habit of only selling
pre-programmed MCUs for some of their projects; for others they'll put the
code up on their website. EPE are the exact opposite. IIRC they've got a
policy of "If it uses a PIC MCU, we want the source code or we won't even
THINK of publishing it". The have made some exceptions; the "PICAXE
projects" articles, for example. The EPE FTP site is jammed full of PIC
code - ftp://ftp.epemag.wimborne.co.uk/pub IIRC. Not much use without the
articles, but still very interesting. I've got every issue of EPE going back
to November 1997. Very informative. Oh, and I've got most issues of
"Electronics: The Maplin Magazine" from Project Book 6 to somewhere in 2000.
I would like to finish off the collection, though. Does anyone know what
happened to Richard Grodzik, the guy who designed the "Universal IR Printer
Adapter" that was published in Electronics And Beyond issue 138 (June 1999)?

Later.
--
Phil.
spam_OUTphilpemTakeThisOuTspamdsl.pipex.com
http://www.philpem.dsl.pipex.com/

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\26@194654 by Jim Korman

flavicon
face
Philip Pemberton wrote:

{Quote hidden}

Just to add, If you don't mind reading on a screen, EPE has an
electronic downloadable
PDF edition at $10US a year.
I'm not surprised to hear about Poptronics, but I'm also worried about
several other
mags (Circuit Cellar is a notable exception). Dr. Dobbs' March issue is
down to around
80 pages. Just as a check in 1995 it was around 160 pages. N&V seems to
been sliding
over the past couple of years also.

Jim

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\26@195736 by Dwayne Reid

flavicon
face
At 06:44 PM 2/26/03 -0600, Jim Korman wrote:

>Just to add, If you don't mind reading on a screen, EPE has an
>electronic downloadable PDF edition at $10US a year.
>
>I'm not surprised to hear about Poptronics, but I'm also worried about
>several other mags (Circuit Cellar is a notable exception).

Just for those who don't already know, Circuit Cellar is also available as
a downloadable version.  Now if only Elektor and Electronics World would
get with this new fangled technology.

dwayne

--
Dwayne Reid   <dwaynerspamKILLspamplanet.eon.net>
Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd    Edmonton, AB, CANADA
(780) 489-3199 voice          (780) 487-6397 fax

Celebrating 19 years of Engineering Innovation (1984 - 2003)
 .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-
    `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'
Do NOT send unsolicited commercial email to this email address.
This message neither grants consent to receive unsolicited
commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\26@200741 by Tom Messenger

flavicon
face
Several people have noticed the 'thinning' of paper journals of late. Me
too. The ones I see monthly are PC Magazine, EDN, Electronic Products and
Electronic Design.  All of them seem to be getting *very* thin.

My feeling is it is because of *YOU* people!

:)

Up to around 5 +/- years ago, magazines were the main source of news for
special segment interest areas.  The astounding success of lists like the
piclist is taking it's toll.  When one of us needs to know where to get
certain info or what's the best component (or component vendor) for some
job, we ask each other.

I seldom look forward to tech journals any more.  If I want to find out
about some new idea, I ask either the piclist, or some other favorite list,
or google.  (Yes, google is first actually).

Look at it from the other point of view: the advertisers who paid for the
tech journals.  Are you going to keep throwing money at a medium with a
shrinking readership?  Or put up a web page complete with PRICING! and
online ordering and datasheets.  If not, you are going to be left behind.
We used to keep and highly value EEM catalogs; I haven't cracked one open
in four years now.

My guess is that the end of Poptronics is a continuing trend.

Just another data point on the highway.
Tom M.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\26@203457 by john chung

flavicon
face
Tom Messenger wrote:

{Quote hidden}

  I guess so. Poptronics *was* very expensive in Malaysia. Very hard to get too....



>
> Just another data point on the highway.
> Tom M.
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
> [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\26@210422 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
At 05:55 PM 2/26/2003 -0700, you wrote:


>Just for those who don't already know, Circuit Cellar is also available as
>a downloadable version.  Now if only Elektor and Electronics World would
>get with this new fangled technology.

Suit yourself on that! If I have to read it on a computer screen, it
*won't* get read. I spend enough time in front of a PC without trying to
read on one.  The technology to make it worthwhile (1200+ DPI high-contrast
color transreflective e-book readers, light and with 4-6 hours battery
life) is probably 10-25 years distant, IMHO.

Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
.....speffKILLspamspam.....interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\26@214551 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Suit yourself on that! If I have to read it on a computer screen, it
> *won't* get read. I spend enough time in front of a PC without trying to
> read on one.  The technology to make it worthwhile (1200+ DPI
high-contrast
> color transreflective e-book readers, light and with 4-6 hours battery
> life) is probably 10-25 years distant, IMHO.

Moore's law (which seems to apply to many other areas of technology than
just the number of transistors, as was originally intended) says it's more
like 10 than 25.

   Amount a technology's individual capabilities increase by in N years =
2^(N/1.5)

   Years to increase capabilities by K = 1.5 x log2(K)

For 10 years this is a factor of 100 odd in ALL areas over existing
technology.
For 25 years that's 50,000+ times.

You can estimate the age of a computer with quite good accuracy (often
within +/- 1 Moores step of 1.5 years or so) by applying Moore's law to eg
HDD size, CD speed, RAM size, processor MIPS = for Wintel = clock speed once
adjusted for buswidth etc and more. Try it to work out how old a 4.3 MHz
8088 based IBM pC must be and you may be surprised.

Try it on PC memory size. A fairly leading edge IBM PC system at intro had
64KB of RAM. (16 KB on 1st introduction - soon grew). Nowadays a similar
system has 1 million KB of RAM (1000 MB)
1,000,000/64 = 16,000.
log2(16000) = 14
14 x 1.5 = 21 years
2003 - 21 = early 1982.
Pretty close.


       Russell McMahon

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\26@221248 by Charles Craft

picon face
There's a line in the "Big Chill" where the writer talks about articles that
a person can finish in the can.

Circuit Cellar, Nuts&Volts and Poptronics go from the post office box to the
vanity in the bathroom.
Hard to keep a laptop on your lap. :-)

I get the electronic version of EPE and print it for the "library". Annoying
that the page numbers don't match the paper version though.

{Original Message removed}

2003\02\26@235158 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
   > The technology to make it worthwhile (1200+ DPI high-contrast
   > color transreflective e-book readers, light and with 4-6 hours battery
   > life) is probably 10-25 years distant, IMHO.

   Moore's law (which seems to apply to many other areas of technology
   than just the number of transistors, as was originally intended) says
   it's more like 10 than 25.

I doubt you'll ever see 1200+ DPI displays.  No market.  The desktop
market has been maxed out at about .28 dot pitch for AGES now.  The
displays are getting bigger, but overall resolution seems to be stuck,
and nearly everyone is happy with it...

The only other missing piece is battery life, and I bet you could get 4-6
hours of life out of many current laptops if the power-consumption was
re-optimized for eBook style usage patterns...  Now that CPU GHz advances
have slowed down due to lack of people buying, I expect battery life to
catch up within 5 years (probably using fuel cell technology.)

BillW

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\02\27@010711 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> I doubt you'll ever see 1200+ DPI displays.  No market.  The desktop
> market has been maxed out at about .28 dot pitch for AGES now.  The
> displays are getting bigger, but overall resolution seems to be stuck,
> and nearly everyone is happy with it...

What the market will bear ....  :-)
But come back and remind me of this in 10 years time and we'll see where
displays have gone to.

Screens are indeed 'adequate" for "normal" uses but distinctly inferior to
hardcopy meia that we are used to.
You don't in fact need 1200 dpi for a text only ebook application but colour
pictures would greatly benefit from something better. The output of a 5MP
digital camera is still not up to good 35mm film quality but you need about
6 CRT screens to display one picture at one pixel per pixel resolution.
(5,000,000/1024/768 = 6.35)
I would LIKE to be able to view a picture of this quality on my screen. I
would like i fact to view 35mm quality pictures and for that I need about 20
MP. For a 13" x 10" screen (the visible display size of the 17" I am sitting
in front of at present) that would need sqrt(20,000,000/13/10) = about 400
pixels per inch. As opposed to the 25.4/.28 = 90 per inch available now.

Moore's law says we COULD have these in 1.5 x log2(600/90) = 4 years :-)

Look to see the new cameras driving expectations somewhat. Current entry
level for anything like srious is 3MP. Prosumer level is 5 to 6 MP. Leading
edge field is 12 MP for cameras and film backs at 25MP are available. 30+MP
for lab use have been around for some while. Being able to see the resultant
pictures on othe rthan hard-copy should be a powerful driver once the public
catch on.

And remember that for displays, projection units suffer badly from quality
at levels that are acceptable on a small screen for one person. The converse
of "What the market will bear" also applies - when one rogue manufacturer
sees a way to offer somewhat better resolution for about the same cost he
will condemn the whole industry to an arms race.

I can't wait :-)



   Russell McMahon





{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@013850 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> The only other missing piece is battery life, and I bet you could get 4-6
> hours of life out of many current laptops if the power-consumption was
> re-optimized for eBook style usage patterns...  Now that CPU GHz advances
> have slowed down due to lack of people buying, I expect battery life to
> catch up within 5 years (probably using fuel cell technology.)

Power consumption of modern laptops is utterly ludicrous. The lemming like
drive to higher CPU speeds has made us forget that a 10 MHz 80286 was a fine
and crisp word processing platform and that an 8088 at 4.33 MHz wasn't too
bad either, albeit most solidly text only.

The early Toshiba 1000 laptops (boot DOS from ROM) had a battery life of the
best part of a day afair. They bought out another with the same model number
subsequently. It was much more thirsty. The original had a horrid display
but that need not be the case with today's technology. An ebook LCD screen
that can be read as easily as a book anywhere there is enough light to read
a paper book should be entirely doable.

Fuel cells (or Stirling engines) will indeed greatly extend battery lives,
but will also help foster the speed/power arms race.



               Russell McMahon

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@014654 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
At 08:51 PM 2/26/2003 -0800, you wrote:

>I doubt you'll ever see 1200+ DPI displays.  No market.

I'd say there is a proven market for the best color printing
available, which is higher quality than 1200 DPI. Low resolution
displays like this one (1600 x 1200 21" CRT- about 105 DPI) lead to
eyestrain after long use. That's 125:1 in the number of pixels,
achievable in only 11 years if it follows Moore's law.

>  The desktop
>market has been maxed out at about .28 dot pitch for AGES now.  The
>displays are getting bigger, but overall resolution seems to be stuck,
>and nearly everyone is happy with it...

I now see laptops with 1600 x 1200 in a 15" display. Microdisplays
with far higher resolution are available, but they are small. Eventually
the Si wafer size should get big enough to allow a whole wafer to be used.
That is only slowly increasing. It was at 3-4" 25 years ago now it is at
8" mostly, with 12" diameter coming on line in the next couple of years.
If it doubles again in 25-30 years, we'd have 16"-24" wafers which could
hold a few book-sized displays each. Probably other things will happen
before this.

>The only other missing piece is battery life, and I bet you could get 4-6
>hours of life out of many current laptops if the power-consumption was
>re-optimized for eBook style usage patterns...  Now that CPU GHz advances
>have slowed down due to lack of people buying, I expect battery life to
>catch up within 5 years (probably using fuel cell technology.)

Better reflective display technology would save power because there would
be no backlight. Passive display technologies such as MIT's e-paper could
save even more, if they ever become practical.

Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
EraseMEspeffspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTinterlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@015811 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
At 07:36 PM 2/27/2003 +1300, you wrote:
> > The only other missing piece is battery life, and I bet you could get 4-6
> > hours of life out of many current laptops if the power-consumption was
> > re-optimized for eBook style usage patterns...  Now that CPU GHz advances
> > have slowed down due to lack of people buying, I expect battery life to
> > catch up within 5 years (probably using fuel cell technology.)
>
>Power consumption of modern laptops is utterly ludicrous. The lemming like
>drive to higher CPU speeds has made us forget that a 10 MHz 80286 was a fine
>and crisp word processing platform and that an 8088 at 4.33 MHz wasn't too

I'm dating myself, but it was 4.77 MHz ;-)

>bad either, albeit most solidly text only.
>
>The early Toshiba 1000 laptops (boot DOS from ROM) had a battery life of the
>best part of a day afair.

I have one of those in the basement. I'd not want to think about how
slowly it would run Word 2000 under WinXP Pro, even with a RAM disk ;-)
(if it could- it can't of course) No hard drive. No backlight.

>They bought out another with the same model number
>subsequently. It was much more thirsty. The original had a horrid display
>but that need not be the case with today's technology. An ebook LCD screen
>that can be read as easily as a book anywhere there is enough light to read
>a paper book should be entirely doable.

And for a reasonable price, not $thousands, for the mass market to appear.

Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
speffspamspam_OUTinterlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@023825 by

flavicon
face
Anyway, as far as I'm concered, there will *never*
be anything like the BYTE magazine...

:-)

Jan-Erik.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@034517 by Neil Bradley

flavicon
face
> Anyway, as far as I'm concered, there will *never*
> be anything like the BYTE magazine...

I dunno... if you didn't mind the narrow range of computers it covered, 80
Microcomputing was an excellent software and hardware hacker's magazine.
Lots of cool mods to the Coco, the TRS-80 Model x's, etc... it really
allowed you to get your money's worth out of your machine.

-->Neil

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Bradley            In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is not
Synthcom Systems, Inc.  king - he's a prisoner.
ICQ #29402898

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@034712 by Kyrre Aalerud

flavicon
face
Wow, you are rambling...

First off, yes! a normal 35mm film has much finer grain than a 5 Mpix
camera.  Unfortunately you need a lot of grains of different colors to make
up a single point in order to see a specific color in the picture.  Thus, a
5 Mpix camera will actually rival a 35mm film.  Only in the hands of a
really pro photographer and a very good lab, in conjunction with a good
negative-film to begin with, does the 35mm still hold some advantages.  In
addition, the normal negative films have a smaller color-range than the RGB
range of a digital camera.

Another thing is if you are going to scan the 35mm film...  You will never
find a 35mm wilm where the grains will make up nice squares matching the
resolution you want to scan at, so you loose some definition there.  The
good scanners will scan the grains instead of entrerpreting them, but the
result is possible moire and a picture with a lot of noise in the higher
frequencys.
If you have a 100x150mm card made out of a 35mm negative, you won't have
more than 300 dpi across that card.  This has to do with the chemical nature
of the card, not the film.  So, watching a 10x15cm glossy isn't all what
it's cranked up to be.
It's often better to go digital from the start if you tend to scan later...

I often take slides as they have a better color-range than negatives.  They
also have better/smaller grain.  I still find a good digital camera will be
just as good a choice.

With the digital-repro breakthrough of doing optical repro of digital
content by projecting the image onto unprocessed photo-paper and develop as
normal, instead of ink-squirting it on, we have a superb result where grain
is totally eliminated (except for the ones that form in the developing of
the card...).  Ofcource, if you are after a certein effect with grains, you
don't want to eliminate them.  In all other aspects, the elimination of
grains will give higher definition and sharpness.

With the Canon EOS 1ds this debate is dead.  It has 11 Mpix and is a SLR
camera.  Only problem now is price, and that will be solved in time.  The
more they sell, the cheaper :-)

   KreAture


{Original Message removed}

2003\02\27@035542 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> I'm dating myself, but it was 4.77 MHz ;-)

Indeed. And I'm dating myself by getting it wrong :-)
Can't imagine how I could ever forget that number.

But, are you going to tell me I'm wrong when I say that my first 5.25"
floppy drive from Shugart had 160kB capacity? :-)


       Russell McMahon

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@040223 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Anyway, as far as I'm concered, there will *never*
> be anything like the BYTE magazine...

Make that 'like the Byte magazine once was'. The last (10's of?) years
of the paper magazine were maybe interesting for managers, but totally
irrelevant for me.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@040825 by

flavicon
face
Still, many of the best photographs during history
has been taken in B/W on Tri-X or similar...
99.99 % of the pics taken with modern digital cameras,
are not "good" photographs by any measure.

Jan-Erik.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@043348 by Stuart Meier

flavicon
picon face
From: "Jan-erik Svderholm (QAC)" <@spam@Jan-erik.SoderholmKILLspamspamPAC.ERICSSON.SE>
> Still, many of the best photographs during history
> has been taken in B/W on Tri-X or similar...
> 99.99 % of the pics taken with modern digital cameras,
> are not "good" photographs by any measure.

I met a sports-photographer recently, bemoaning digital. He used to take a roll
of film, and his skill was to catch the 'telling moment' in the sport. With
digital, loads of competitors taking hundreds and hundreds of images, 99.99% of
which were junk. But they could post-select the good one or two they caught by
chance.

Stuart

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@044217 by Kyrre Aalerud

flavicon
face
This has to do with experience of the man behind the camera, not the
film/camera...

   KreAture

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan-erik Söderholm (QAC)" <KILLspamJan-erik.SoderholmKILLspamspamPAC.ERICSSON.SE>
To: <RemoveMEPICLISTTakeThisOuTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: [PIC]: Poptronics no more :-(


{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@051213 by David W.S. King

flavicon
face
> From: "Jan-erik Svderholm (QAC)"
> <spamBeGoneJan-erik.SoderholmspamBeGonespamPAC.ERICSSON.SE>
> > Still, many of the best photographs during history
> > has been taken in B/W on Tri-X or similar...
> > 99.99 % of the pics taken with modern digital cameras,
> > are not "good" photographs by any measure.
>
> I met a sports-photographer recently, bemoaning digital. He
> used to take a roll
> of film, and his skill was to catch the 'telling moment' in
> the sport. With
> digital, loads of competitors taking hundreds and hundreds
> of images, 99.99% of
> which were junk. But they could post-select the good one or
> two they caught by
> chance.
>
> Stuart

Still are some things you can only get with film, especially
tri-x and the right lighting. If things get to the point where
you can't get film stock then we've lost more than we've gained.
Aside from ability to capture fast frames of action there is
something to be said about what someone who knows what they are
doing when they play with fast/grainy B&W

Dave
(film noir fan)

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@062732 by michael brown

picon face
From: "David W.S. King" <TakeThisOuTkingdwsEraseMEspamspam_OUTSHAW.CA>

> Still are some things you can only get with film, especially
> tri-x and the right lighting. If things get to the point where
> you can't get film stock then we've lost more than we've gained.
> Aside from ability to capture fast frames of action there is
> something to be said about what someone who knows what they are
> doing when they play with fast/grainy B&W
>
> Dave
> (film noir fan)

I couldn't agree more.  There are things that can be done with film that
will likely never be done with digital cameras.  This aside from the
fact that film and print paper have an entirely different contrast level
than does the digital method.  I can't imagine that film will ever fully
disappear.  I can imagine a cheap, self-contained (perhaps even pic
controlled) film developer and print processor.  ;-)

When it comes to the arts, newer technology is not necessarily better.
IMO, double exposure just ain't the same as alpha blending.  ;-)

michael brown (amateur photographer)

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@073354 by David Duffy

flavicon
face
Jim:
>Just to add, If you don't mind reading on a screen, EPE has an
>electronic downloadable
>PDF edition at $10US a year.

Thanks Jim, I just had a look and subscribed to the electronic
format for 12 months. It was US$10.99 (about AU$20) which
is less than what *two* paper issues would cost over here.
It's not as "professional looking" as our own Silicon Chip mag
over here but worth the price anyway. I don't mind the idea of
electronic magazines - cheaper, less trees cut down, cheaper,
easy to archive, cheaper, etc. Did I mention it was cheaper? :-)
David...

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@075038 by

flavicon
face
You don't mind publishing the URL to EPE ?
I tried http://www.epe.com, which was something completly
different (but never the less interesting) :-)

Jan-Erik Söderholm

David Duffy wrote :
> Thanks Jim, I just had a look and subscribed to the electronic
> format for 12 months.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@083400 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
> I met a sports-photographer recently, bemoaning digital. He used to
> take a roll of film, and his skill was to catch the 'telling moment' in
> the sport. With digital, loads of competitors taking hundreds and
> hundreds of images, 99.99% of which were junk. But they could
> post-select the good one or two they caught by chance.

An experienced photographer once told me it's very easy to be a good
photographer.  All you have to do is only show your good pictures.  How
true.

I used to do a reasonable amount of photography (back when I had time
before wife, house, kid), some of it even for pay as an aside to my day
job.  I built a nice color darkroom in the basement when I bought my house
in 1985.  Since then everything has gone digital except the camera itself.
I don't miss messing with chemicals and process variables just to get one
shot at a color print every 20 minutes.  Now I can print any number of
guaranteed identical copies that are just as good (probably a little
better) than wet silver prints on my Epson photographic printer.

I have a Polaroid slide/negative scanner that can do a bit under
10Mpixels.  That's not everything the film can do, but it's "pretty good"
for most applications, and all that was personally affordable back when I
bought it a few years ago.

However, digital cameras still have a way to go in price/performance
before they can rival 35mm film cameras.  My Nikon F3-T is 20 years old,
and cost well under $1000 at the time.  Even factoring in inflation, I
doubt the whole setup with camera, lenses, and flash would exceed $2500 in
today's dollars.  You still have to pay several times that today to get a
digital camera that can match the flexibility, features, and quality.  And
then film is a very efficient storage medium.  It is light weight, cheap,
non volatile, doesn't require power, and is quite dense.

Digital photography has come a long way, but expect it will be another 5
years before I can buy a digital camera that allows me to use my existing
lenses, thru the lens viewing, equivalent to 35mm film resolution,
affordable swappable non-volatile memory modules that can handle at least
15 full resolution full quality pictures, with a price under $1000.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@102805 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, Jan-erik Söderholm (QAC) wrote:

> Anyway, as far as I'm concered, there will *never*
> be anything like the BYTE magazine...

... Including BYTE Magazine.  I first saw BYTE in about 1979 or '80 and
remember when it too had hardware articles and projects, rather than the
collection of commercial software reviews that made up the whole fo the
last issue I saw - someone tell me if that's changed.  I can't bear to
look.

Dale
-- It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@122643 by Charles Craft

picon face
The best part of Byte rolled out into Circuit Cellar. (IMHO)

Steve Ciarcia gives his view of Byte's demise:
http://www.circuitcellar.com/library/priorityinterrupt/150.asp




--{Original Message removed}

2003\02\27@142203 by Dwayne Reid

flavicon
face
At 07:36 PM 2/27/03 +1300, Russell McMahon wrote:

>The early Toshiba 1000 laptops (boot DOS from ROM) had a battery life of the
>best part of a day afair.

I still keep 4 or 5 of those exact units floating around - they make GREAT
serial terminals.  Plus: they still run the old versions of MPASM and the
original PICstart 16B & 17C programmers used to program the PICs in some of
my older industrial control panels.  Battery life (modern ni-cads) is about
12 hours.

>The original had a horrid display but that need not be the case with
>today's technology.

An absolutely horrible screen, indeed.  But adequate for occasional serial
terminal use.

dwayne

--
Dwayne Reid   <RemoveMEdwaynerspamTakeThisOuTplanet.eon.net>
Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd    Edmonton, AB, CANADA
(780) 489-3199 voice          (780) 487-6397 fax

Celebrating 19 years of Engineering Innovation (1984 - 2003)
 .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-
    `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'
Do NOT send unsolicited commercial email to this email address.
This message neither grants consent to receive unsolicited
commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@151858 by Igor Pokorny

flavicon
face
Hello guys,

reading this topic makes me to tear.... I am probably older you are but not
very much... I loved to read Byte because of Garcia's constructions, never
the less I wasn't able to realize any of her projects living behind a steel
curtain :-((  I had  have to buy my first 8080 in West Germany in 1979.
Anyway the Piclist isn't place for such discussion.... Maybe we should found
another one... The PIC elderly corner for instance :-))))

Igor

{Original Message removed}

2003\02\27@161307 by David Duffy

flavicon
face
At 10:48 PM 27/02/2003, you wrote:
>You don't mind publishing the URL to EPE ?
>I tried http://www.epe.com, which was something completly
>different (but never the less interesting) :-)

http://www.epemag.com
David...

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\27@193723 by Jim Korman

flavicon
face
Jan-erik Svderholm (QAC) wrote:

>You don't mind publishing the URL to EPE ?
>I tried http://www.epe.com, which was something completly
>different (but never the less interesting) :-)
>
>Jan-Erik Svderholm
>
>David Duffy wrote :
>
>>Thanks Jim, I just had a look and subscribed to the electronic
>>format for 12 months.
>>
>
>--
>http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
>(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics
>
Sorry.

EPE Online page  http://www.epemag.com/

EPE Main page  http://www.epemag.wimborne.co.uk/
-------------------
To the Digital vs Film crowd. I've got a Canon 2 meg digital for stuff.
For the real good shots I've still got my 30+ year old Minolta SRT-101.

I've noticed that with the digital I'm not always able to get "just the
shot"
that I can with the SLR.

Jim

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\02\28@041104 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Spehro Pefhany wrote:

*>At 05:55 PM 2/26/2003 -0700, you wrote:
*>
*>
*>>Just for those who don't already know, Circuit Cellar is also available as
*>>a downloadable version.  Now if only Elektor and Electronics World would
*>>get with this new fangled technology.
*>
*>Suit yourself on that! If I have to read it on a computer screen, it
*>*won't* get read. I spend enough time in front of a PC without trying to
*>read on one.  The technology to make it worthwhile (1200+ DPI high-contrast

300dpi is all you need for eyes only, if you're human that is, imho
(300dpi uses 85 micron pixels - it's also the base unit of Post Script). I
do not know what you prefer but the point is that once it's online you do
NOT need to read it. Just search for it using a serach engine ... Once you
know what you are looking for.  That would be hinted at by short one-page
itro articles which you would read (like a newsletter).

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@041120 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
Scroll down ...

On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Tom Messenger wrote:

*>Several people have noticed the 'thinning' of paper journals of late. Me
*>too. The ones I see monthly are PC Magazine, EDN, Electronic Products and
*>Electronic Design.  All of them seem to be getting *very* thin.
*>
*>My feeling is it is because of *YOU* people!
*>
*>:)
*>
*>Up to around 5 +/- years ago, magazines were the main source of news for
*>special segment interest areas.  The astounding success of lists like the
*>piclist is taking it's toll.  When one of us needs to know where to get

Imho a magazine worth anything with a circulation of ~2000 like the
piclist would be bankrupt by the first edition or so. There has to be
another explanation. Maybe it's because advertisers pulled the plug on
IT/Technology due to what is happening to tech stocks.

*>certain info or what's the best component (or component vendor) for some
*>job, we ask each other.
*>
*>I seldom look forward to tech journals any more.  If I want to find out
*>about some new idea, I ask either the piclist, or some other favorite list,
*>or google.  (Yes, google is first actually).

Lately whenever I pick up a tech journal and read an article after finding
it with some difficulty among the advertising, I ask myself whether a) it
advertises or sells something or b) it advertises the author. I'm looking
hard for c) teaches something good but I find it very seldomly. On the
contrary I find 20 year old books very useful. Comparisons between 10 year
old Elektors and todays make me want to cry. All the good content is gone
imho.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@045201 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> 300dpi is all you need for eyes only, if you're human that is, imho

The HP laser printers up to ?HP2 used 300 DPI. AFAIR the HP3 introduced
"resolution enhancement technology" (RET) which cheated by smoothing lines,
adding small dots at corners etc. The results were visually far superior. At
300 dpi without such tricks there are still substantial "jaggies" and other
digital attributes. RET allowed imaging at 300 dpi but effectively added
more dpi by interpolating. I think you need to get about 600 pi to achieve
the same result straight BUT you can;'t easily be sure as RET and its
imitators are de rigeur at all dpi's these days.

       RM

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@070710 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
>> The astounding success of list*s* like the piclist

> Imho a magazine worth anything with a circulation of ~2000 like the
> piclist would be bankrupt by the first edition or so. There has to be
> another explanation.

Note the plural: there are lots of lists like the piclist (ok, of course
there is no list like the piclist). Together they might have drawn quite
an audience away from magazines. And the manufacturers themselves have
their websites to communicate with their users.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@071658 by erholm (QAC)

flavicon
face
Isn't one other explanation also that electronics as
a hobby just isn't as large as it might have been ?
Now, Playstations, PC-games, MTV and such draws much
more interest from the young today. Today we don't
*make* things ourself, we buy, buy, buy, consume,
consume, consume...

Jan-Erik.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@073126 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
At 01:13 PM 2/28/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>Isn't one other explanation also that electronics as
>a hobby just isn't as large as it might have been ?
>Now, Playstations, PC-games, MTV and such draws much
>more interest from the young today. Today we don't
>*make* things ourself, we buy, buy, buy, consume,
>consume, consume...

Yes. And the gap between what you can buy for next-to-nothing and what
you can build has grown ever greater. Most pieces of consumer electronics
would cost at least 10 times more to build (if you could find the parts)
than to buy. Kind of takes some of the fun out of it.

Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
speffEraseMEspam.....interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@074357 by

flavicon
face
>Yes. And the gap between what you can buy for next-to-nothing and what
>you can build has grown ever greater. Most pieces of consumer electronics
>would cost at least 10 times more to build (if you could find the parts)
>than to buy. Kind of takes some of the fun out of it.
>
>Best regards,
>Spehro Pefhany


Problem is, where should we find the electronic engineers
of the future ? I'm afraid not in the part of the would
where the "MTV-generation" lives.

Right at this very moment, on Swedish radio channel "P1", there
is an economical program where they are talking about the
coming world economics. China has a "plan" to be the leading
global economic force in 10-20 years (if I listned correctly).
They are right on track, if you ask me...

Jan-Erik.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@075456 by Dave Tweed

face
flavicon
face
"Peter L. Peres" <EraseMEplpspamACTCOM.CO.IL> wrote:
> (300dpi uses 85 micron pixels - it's also the base unit of Post Script).

No, the default "base unit" of the PostScript language is the "point", or
1/72 inch. The language makes no assumptions about the resolution of the
rendering hardware.

-- Dave Tweed

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@080110 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
The best emerging display technology is retinal projection. Not LCD.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@080937 by Dave Tweed

face
flavicon
face
"Peter L. Peres" <RemoveMEplpEraseMEspamEraseMEACTCOM.CO.IL> wrote:
> Lately whenever I pick up a tech journal and read an article after finding
> it with some difficulty among the advertising, I ask myself whether a) it
> advertises or sells something or b) it advertises the author. I'm looking
> hard for c) teaches something good but I find it very seldomly.

Are you reading Circuit Cellar at all? We try very hard to steer away from
a) and achieve c), and I think we succeed most of the time. Although I'm
not sure what your objection is to b). Most authors write because they're
trying to get some kind of exposure or name recognition, and this isn't
necessarily a bad thing, because it means they're motivated to do a good
job. We just make sure they do c) as well.

-- Dave Tweed
  Circuit Cellar editor

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@091331 by Alex Perez

flavicon
face
I know how you feel.  I am a teenager with a love for electronics, and trying to get other kids into it just turns them off.  They just feel that people will labelthem as "nerds" or "geeks"  and then ther life will be over!  The humanity!

I AM thinkingof starting a robotics club in my highschool, and the school is pretty big, so we'll see what happens...


{Quote hidden}

______________________________________________________
Get Paid... With Your Free Email at
http://www.zwallet.com/index.html?user=coindood

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@112547 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
Peter L. Peres wrote:
> The best emerging display technology is retinal projection. Not LCD.

Bzzzzt.  Pooof.  Whoops, sorry about the eye.  It should stop smoking
soon.  Milliwatts, microwatts, their all so confusing!


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@113207 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
> I know how you feel.  I am a teenager with a love for electronics, and
> trying to get other kids into it just turns them off.  They just feel
> that people will labelthem as "nerds" or "geeks"  and then ther life
> will be over!

They will anyway.  That's OK though because you get to laugh at them 20
years later as they vacuum the floor in your office.

> I AM thinkingof starting a robotics club in my highschool, and the
> school is pretty big, so we'll see what happens...

Go for it.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@121414 by michael brown

picon face
Olin Lathrop wrote:
> Peter L. Peres wrote:
>> The best emerging display technology is retinal projection. Not LCD.
>
> Bzzzzt.  Pooof.  Whoops, sorry about the eye.  It should stop smoking
> soon.  Milliwatts, microwatts, their all so confusing!

That's precisely why I didn't go for the IR vision tracking version of
the auto-focus Canon's.  Who knows how bright the light is that they
use, IR and all.  ;-)

michael brown

"In the land of the blind, he who has one eye is king"

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@122445 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
   Note the plural: there are lots of lists like the piclist (ok, of
   course there is no list like the piclist). Together they might have
   drawn quite an audience away from magazines.

I dunno.  Most internet discussion lists make me appreciate little
things like EDITTING a lot more than I used to.  The same way that
unsuccessful web search make me appreciate library science...


   And the manufacturers themselves have
   their websites to communicate with their users.

This is a reasonable explanation of the demise of the "advertising only"
trade journals...

BillW

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@122459 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
> "In the land of the blind, he who has one eye is king"

Unless he is a retinal projection salesman.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@123011 by Tim Webb

flavicon
face
I think it may be time to move the Poptronics to [OT]due to lack of relevance to [PIC]

-----Original Message-----
From: Olin Lathrop [RemoveMEolin_piclistKILLspamspamEMBEDINC.COM]
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 9:22 AM
To: PICLISTSTOPspamspamspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: [PIC]: Poptronics no more :-(


> "In the land of the blind, he who has one eye is king"

Unless he is a retinal projection salesman.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@123414 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
At 11:31 AM 2/28/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> > I know how you feel.  I am a teenager with a love for electronics, and
> > trying to get other kids into it just turns them off.  They just feel
> > that people will labelthem as "nerds" or "geeks"  and then ther life
> > will be over!
>
>They will anyway.  That's OK though because you get to laugh at them 20
>years later as they vacuum the floor in your office.

If they become lawyers or real-estate developers, they may be the
ones laughing. Or salespersons, if they are any good at it.

Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
spamBeGonespeffSTOPspamspamEraseMEinterlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@140446 by michael brown

picon face
Olin Lathrop wrote:
>> "In the land of the blind, he who has one eye is king"
>
> Unless he is a retinal projection salesman.

Man, you're sure in a jovial mood today; I like it, keep up the good
work.  ;-)

michael brown

"In the land of the blind, he who has one eye is king"

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@143728 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Russell McMahon wrote:

*>> 300dpi is all you need for eyes only, if you're human that is, imho
*>
*>The HP laser printers up to ?HP2 used 300 DPI. AFAIR the HP3 introduced
*>"resolution enhancement technology" (RET) which cheated by smoothing lines,
*>adding small dots at corners etc. The results were visually far superior. At
*>300 dpi without such tricks there are still substantial "jaggies" and other
*>digital attributes. RET allowed imaging at 300 dpi but effectively added
*>more dpi by interpolating. I think you need to get about 600 pi to achieve
*>the same result straight BUT you can;'t easily be sure as RET and its
*>imitators are de rigeur at all dpi's these days.

Maybe but I have seen 300dpi printouts with grayscale antialiasing that
looked very very good. Remember we are talking mostly text and line
drawings here (the op was referring to reading magazines online). Since
Spehro uses a lot of PostScript he should know. Maybe he wrote what he
wrote because he does know. Anyway a paper white high resolution monitor
is much easier on the eyes than a 0.21 dot color monitor, even if run in
B/W, and the resolution limit is much higher than for color.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@144835 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Jan-erik Soderholm (QAC) wrote:

*>Isn't one other explanation also that electronics as
*>a hobby just isn't as large as it might have been ?
*>Now, Playstations, PC-games, MTV and such draws much
*>more interest from the young today. Today we don't
*>*make* things ourself, we buy, buy, buy, consume,
*>consume, consume...

I wonder whether there are electronics mags in China and how good they
might be.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@151125 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Dave Tweed wrote:

*>"Peter L. Peres" <KILLspamplpspamBeGonespamACTCOM.CO.IL> wrote:
*>> Lately whenever I pick up a tech journal and read an article after finding
*>> it with some difficulty among the advertising, I ask myself whether a) it
*>> advertises or sells something or b) it advertises the author. I'm looking
*>> hard for c) teaches something good but I find it very seldomly.
*>
*>Are you reading Circuit Cellar at all? We try very hard to steer away from

I don't get it here, never did. I saw a few old numbers at a friend's and
I was impressed. All tech mags and now PC mags with some content have
disappeared from newsstands here. Private ordering mags through a shop is
very expensive (often 5 times cover price). Direct subscription works but
there are certain ropes with credit cards and exchange rates and overseas
billing and such. The short explanation to this is known as 'send and
pray' ;-(. There is also the item of specialty parts which are unobtainium
here (at least at normal prices - meaning not more than 2 times the price
elsewhere).

*>a) and achieve c), and I think we succeed most of the time. Although I'm
*>not sure what your objection is to b). Most authors write because they're
*>trying to get some kind of exposure or name recognition, and this isn't
*>necessarily a bad thing, because it means they're motivated to do a good
*>job. We just make sure they do c) as well.

I don't object to b) but I feel that a good advertisement for someone's
work should be more like a scientific paper than like a text in which the
words 'and on my/our/their website at ... you will ...' appear with
about the frequency of punctuation marks.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@151812 by Daniel Imfeld

picon face
Great idea!  I was in the robotics club at my high school a couple of
years ago and it was a great experience.  If you're in the USA and
you're interested in more than just fooling around with various items
(i.e. a real competition), you might want to look into FIRST robotics.
They'll give you some parts, including motors, a control computer
partially based on the BASIC Stamp, speed controllers, pneumatics,
sensors, and a bunch of other stuff.

Then, if you and the school can find some sponsors, you can buy the
metal you need and gears and such, and put together a complete robot and
go compete.  I don't remember if this was set up by FIRST or not, but we
had two engineers from JPL who helped us with the design, so you get to
learn from the people who are already doing it.  Overall, it's a
wonderful thing to do, and definitely a good way to get people more
interested in engineering.

Daniel Imfeld


On Friday, February 28, 2003 1:10 AM, Alex Perez <EraseMEcoindoodspamEraseMEZWALLET.COM>
wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@152220 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
WARNING:  DO NOT LOOK INTO LASER WITH REMAINING EYE.

-Adam

Olin Lathrop wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@152436 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Olin Lathrop wrote:

*>Peter L. Peres wrote:
*>> The best emerging display technology is retinal projection. Not LCD.
*>
*>Bzzzzt.  Pooof.  Whoops, sorry about the eye.  It should stop smoking
*>soon.  Milliwatts, microwatts, their all so confusing!

If you search a bit you will see that this is serious. Someone already
have a working model with several hundreds of lines resolution. With TI's
DLP technology and some market-driven funding it should be there pretty
soon I think. How about a 2048x2048 visualizer that can be duct taped to
your eyeglasses frame, and is about the size and weight of a cigarillo,
and runs on 100mW ?

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@153053 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, michael brown wrote:

*>Olin Lathrop wrote:
*>> Peter L. Peres wrote:
*>>> The best emerging display technology is retinal projection. Not LCD.
*>>
*>> Bzzzzt.  Pooof.  Whoops, sorry about the eye.  It should stop smoking
*>> soon.  Milliwatts, microwatts, their all so confusing!
*>
*>That's precisely why I didn't go for the IR vision tracking version of
*>the auto-focus Canon's.  Who knows how bright the light is that they
*>use, IR and all.  ;-)

It is not that bright. You can check with a CCTV camera that sees near IR.
On the contrary, I find the redeye reduction preflash/af illuminator
blinding (not on that lens).  Canon also had a model of 8mm video camera
with eye tracking of the metering 'hotspot' area and a few effects
switched with the eye (blink on blink off). It was a nice trick.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@163416 by michael brown

picon face
Peter L. Peres wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, michael brown wrote:
>
> *>Olin Lathrop wrote:
> *>> Peter L. Peres wrote:
> *>>> The best emerging display technology is retinal projection. Not
> LCD. *>>
> *>> Bzzzzt.  Pooof.  Whoops, sorry about the eye.  It should stop
> smoking *>> soon.  Milliwatts, microwatts, their all so confusing!
> *>
> *>That's precisely why I didn't go for the IR vision tracking version
> of *>the auto-focus Canon's.  Who knows how bright the light is that
> they *>use, IR and all.  ;-)
>
> It is not that bright. You can check with a CCTV camera that sees
> near IR. On the contrary, I find the redeye reduction preflash/af
> illuminator blinding (not on that lens).  Canon also had a model of
> 8mm video camera with eye tracking of the metering 'hotspot' area and
> a few effects switched with the eye (blink on blink off). It was a
> nice trick.

That's good to know.  I know what you mean about the red-eye reduction,
I wonder how many catatonic siezures they've caused.  ;-)  I was quite
surprised to see how "bright" I/R remote controls are when I was playing
with a web cam one time.

michael brown

"In the land of the blind, he who has one eye is king"

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@183020 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, Peter L. Peres wrote:

> Lately whenever I pick up a tech journal and read an article after finding
> it with some difficulty among the advertising, I ask myself whether a) it
> advertises or sells something or b) it advertises the author. I'm looking
> hard for c) teaches something good but I find it very seldomly. On the
> contrary I find 20 year old books very useful. Comparisons between 10 year
> old Elektors and todays make me want to cry. All the good content is gone
> imho.

I have a theory about that.

Ten years ago, having an idea for a product was about 2% of the total
effort.  Building it was maybe 8%, finding money to fund producing it was
maybe another 20%, and the other 70% was getting the word to potential
buyers.  The cost of advertising and marketing and taking orders and
credit card processing was so daunting as to make most projects have no
comemrcial value.

Now I can cook up a project, put it up on the Web, set up for credit card
payment processing (PayPal), advertise to a targeted, focused group of
potential buyers (lists, web sites, PayPal shops, eBay, etc), the whole
thing -- for *nothing*.  Nada, not a dime.  If I didn't already have
expertise and facilities to run my own web server and email, OK, maybe a
couple hundred bucks for the whole exercise.  Now all of a sudden my
project that would once have been an excellent candidate for a magazine
article looks more like a viable commercial product.  Let's see...  what
pays more, a cheap magazine or potentially selling a few hundred or a few
thousand widgets?  Or even a few tens?  Follow the money.  Look at the
thousands of people selling crap that would once have been the subject of
articles in the magazines that don't exist any more, or those that don't
have the good content they used to.

Hey, I'm as guity as anyone.  I developed a 12F629 based Morse code keyer
that would make a killer magazine article in QST or wherever.  It's on my
web site for sale, ten bucks a pop or so with shipping.  I am thinking
about using the same code base to build a Morse speed drill box, a foxhunt
beacon, maybe a few other things...  Sorry, guys, the magazine doesn't pay
enough at this point.  I may change my mind, but I think the same thing is
happening a lot.  I just think the magazines don't offer enough money to
entice people to write up the articles any more.  So yes, I think the Web
is helping to kill off print magazines, but not for the reasons you might
think.

Maybe I'll write that article after all.  Who's left to publish it?

Dale
--
It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@183423 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> blinding (not on that lens).  Canon also had a model of 8mm video camera
> with eye tracking of the metering 'hotspot' area and a few effects
> switched with the eye (blink on blink off). It was a nice trick.

Minolta Dimage 7xx turns on viewfinder and LCD panel off when you put your
eye to the viewfinder.



       RM

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@184026 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
> Maybe I'll write that article after all.  Who's left to publish it?

And who's left to read it?

I am reading fewer magazines than I was 10 years ago, and I don't think
lack of content is the issue (I wouldn't know, since I'm not reading
them).  I feel a lot busier now, and it seems there are other more
convenient sources of info.  I don't need ideas about 203 things you can
build with a 555 timer, a 741 opamp, a 2N3055 power transistor, and a
16F84.  And, I can certainly do without 3 pages of ads that the 1 page
article is contorted around, not to mention those annoying inserts to
subscribe to the very magazine I'm already subscribed to, else I wouldn't
be reading it.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@184431 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
There's nothing that stops a project from being both "for sale" AND published
in a project-oriented magazine.  Lots of the "old" pop electronics articles
were like that: here's how you make it; pre-made PCB for $$, kit for $$,
fully assembled for $$$.  There are an awful lot of "armchair" magazine
(or website, or mailing list) readers out there who appreciate knowing about
the internals of a device, but are just as likely to pay extra for someone
else to do whatever they think is "the hard part."

How many of you "old BYTE" lovers actually built some project from the
magazine?  Or even typed in some program listing or implemented some
algorithm?

BillW

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@185648 by Mark Samuels

flavicon
face
I've sold quite a few of the development kit that went along with my
CompactFlash to PIC interface that I wrote about in a Circuit Cellar Online
article.  But, I'm sure many more have implemented everything
themselves.  I really did just write the article for informative purposes,
but my boss wanted to try to make a buck off of it. ;-)

-Mark



At 03:44 PM 2/28/03 -0800, you wrote:
{Quote hidden}

-------------------------------------------
Mark Samuels
ARMA Design
Tel:(858) 373-1320 x115
Fax:(858) 373-1325
Email: TakeThisOuTmark.....spamTakeThisOuTarmanet.com
Web: http://www.armanet.com



The information contained in this electronic message is private and may
contain privileged, confidential or inside information.  Any distribution,
copying or forwarding or use of this communication by anyone other than the
intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@191944 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
At 05:29 PM 2/28/2003 -0600, you wrote:


>Hey, I'm as guity as anyone.  I developed a 12F629 based Morse code keyer
>that would make a killer magazine article in QST or wherever.  It's on my
>web site for sale, ten bucks a pop or so with shipping.  I am thinking
>about using the same code base to build a Morse speed drill box, a foxhunt
>beacon, maybe a few other things...  Sorry, guys, the magazine doesn't pay
>enough at this point.  I may change my mind, but I think the same thing is
>happening a lot.  I just think the magazines don't offer enough money to
>entice people to write up the articles any more.  So yes, I think the Web
>is helping to kill off print magazines, but not for the reasons you might
>think.
>
>Maybe I'll write that article after all.  Who's left to publish it?

Even if the money vs. hassles of cottage industry are not compelling--
a fellow I know knows a lot about a certain kind of gadget (rotary
phase converters used to power old industrial 3-phase machinery in
your garage from regular 240V single phase power). The most applicable
magazine will pay him a whopping $25.00 for an article. After publication.
With photos. He's one of the top engineers at a major S. Cal aerospace
firm you'd all recognize. 25 bux is nothing. He'd rather set it up on his
web site his way and give it away for FREE than fiddle around with a human
editor, signing contracts, declaring income with W-whatevers, paying
postage and all that stuff just for the dubious thrill of seeing his name
in print on dead trees.

Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
TakeThisOuTspeffKILLspamspamspaminterlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@201629 by Jinx

face picon face
> WARNING:  DO NOT LOOK INTO LASER WITH REMAINING EYE.
>
> -Adam

Wow, synchronicity - drew this up a couple of days ago as a label
for a perimeter alarm (the laser isn't actually too nasty)

http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/joecolquitt/dang.html

Originally saw one like it in a robotics doco

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\02\28@221459 by Ian McLean

flavicon
face
My advise is to leave the gimmicky red eye reduction alone.  It works by
attempting to reduce the size of your pupil before the real flash.

The only way to remove red eye completely is to have the flash off to the
side of the camera.  Normal flash - no catatonic seizures.


{Original Message removed}


'[PIC]: Poptronics no more :-('
2003\03\01@111354 by erholm (QAC)
flavicon
face
Most photo editing software has some kind
of read eye correction function. The one I'v used
was in "ACDSee", and it worked just OK.
Jan-Erik Soderholm

Ian McLean wrote:
>My advise is to leave the gimmicky red eye reduction alone.  It works by
>attempting to reduce the size of your pupil before the real flash.
>The only way to remove red eye completely is to have the flash off to the
>side of the camera.  Normal flash - no catatonic seizures.

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email .....listservspamRemoveMEmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2003\03\01@112158 by Ian McLean

flavicon
face
Agreed.  Most photo processing places can do the same thing for film based
photographs as well.  But I honestly believe that prevention is better than
cure - esp. when it comes to digitally "doctoring" photo images.

Call me a purist.

Rgs
Ian.

{Original Message removed}

2003\03\01@112620 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
> My advise is to leave the gimmicky red eye reduction alone.  It works
> by attempting to reduce the size of your pupil before the real flash.

The red eye reduction flash is only a fraction of a second before the real
flash and exposure.  I don't think the iris responds that fast.

The explanation I heard is that it causes you to look at the flash instead
of into the lens.  This different angle reduces the light that bounces
directly back from your eye.  I'm a little skeptical that such a slight
different in eye angle would make a significant difference in the red eye
reflection, so this explanation is only slightly more plausible than the
one above.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email RemoveMElistservspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2003\03\01@113229 by Larry G. Nelson Sr.

picon face
First robotics is not cheap but it is a great program. I have been working
with the WPI / Mass Academy team this year as one of the mentors and they
have done a phenomenal job. Take a look at the INS system they built for
this years game. During the first 15 seconds of the game the robots are
autonomous and this guides the robot to the locations they want. If they
get bumped off course or a wheel slips the system compensates. Under driver
control they can activate a heading hold function and the robot will
maintain the heading the driver wants.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/pictures.php?s=&action=single&picid=3901&direction=DESC&sort=date&perrow=4&trows=3&quiet=verbose




At 12:17 PM 2/28/03 -0800, you wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Larry G. Nelson Sr.
@spam@L.NelsonRemoveMEspamEraseMEieee.org
http://www.mchipguru.com

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email EraseMElistservspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2003\03\01@151410 by michael brown

picon face
Olin Lathrop wrote:
>> My advise is to leave the gimmicky red eye reduction alone.  It works
>> by attempting to reduce the size of your pupil before the real flash.
>
> The red eye reduction flash is only a fraction of a second before the
> real flash and exposure.  I don't think the iris responds that fast.

I've seen some that flash three or four times before the shutter is
released.  They are quite blinding.  8-)

> The explanation I heard is that it causes you to look at the flash
> instead of into the lens.  This different angle reduces the light
> that bounces directly back from your eye.  I'm a little skeptical
> that such a slight different in eye angle would make a significant
> difference in the red eye reflection, so this explanation is only
> slightly more plausible than the one above.

This could be true, as just raising the flash a few inches seems to make
a significant difference in the amount of red-eye (or green-eye as in
the case of my cats)  ;-)

michael brown

"In the land of the blind, he who has one eye is king"

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email @spam@listservspam_OUTspam.....mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2003\03\01@213154 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
>>   First robotics is not cheap but it is a great program.

Well, there are all sorts of levels of robotics, and some of them are a lot
cheaper than others.  At the bottom of the list, you have BEAM, which makes
use of 'minimal' electronics and 'found' parts.  Then there are the various
toy-based robots; if MIT teaches a robotics based on LEGO, it certainly
ought to be OK for a high school club. And "Cyber knex" seems to be getting
discontinued and is available pretty cheap some places (heh.  Picked up a
"cyber knex ultra" set for $16 at a "Marshall's" outlet store...)

You don't really get to the expensive stuff until you want to buy major
parts and components ("someone go get another PC104 isolated digital IO
card), and that's probably less 'educational' anyway...

Building your own PIC-based (or stamp-based, or quarter-stamp, or whatever)
will save you a lot of money...

Robot clubs tend to get composed of computer geeks.  If your school
has shop classes and/or voTech programs, see if you can find someone
mechanically inclined who's also interested in robots, that'll be a
big help (the teachers are good for finding such people.)

BillW

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email spamBeGonelistservEraseMEspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2003\03\01@235635 by David Duffy

flavicon
face
At 02:24 AM 2/03/2003, you wrote:
> > My advise is to leave the gimmicky red eye reduction alone.  It works
> > by attempting to reduce the size of your pupil before the real flash.

Olin:
>The red eye reduction flash is only a fraction of a second before the real
>flash and exposure.  I don't think the iris responds that fast.

The ones I've seen seemed to be about 1 second before the main flash
and exposure.
David...

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listservspamBeGonespammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2003\03\02@122237 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, William Chops Westfield wrote:

> How many of you "old BYTE" lovers actually built some project from the
> magazine?  Or even typed in some program listing or implemented some
> algorithm?

I never did, but their projects very often contributed to mine.
Fantastic learning tool.  Ciarcia's were always awesome, I still have my
two Ciarcia's Circuit Cellar books.

Dale
--
It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-request@spam@spamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu>

2003\03\02@124343 by Igor Pokorny

flavicon
face
A notice only.
One of not many magazines of electronics here is sponzored by the biggest
seller of components. They have a pretty smart strategy. They announce a
competition about the best construction of a year with prizes. The magazin
publishs the constructions for the rest of a year along with description of
new microcontrollers, articles for beginners and so one, and   - it's
probably the most important - what new you can get from the sponzor. No
another ads. I think it's smart because the magazin is very cheap and
probably profitable. Not bad for a state with 10 million people :-)

Regards

Igor


{Original Message removed}

2003\03\02@141336 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> How many of you "old BYTE" lovers actually built some project from the
> magazine?  Or even typed in some program listing or implemented some
> algorithm?

I don't think I ever build something from any magazine without modifying
it. It is the example function that was most important to me, and for
that the 'old byte' was excellent. But in those days there were many
more interesting magazines, the Dutch computers club (HCC) for instance
was very good. Now CC (circuits) and DD (algorithms) are about all that
remain. Ok, EPE and N&V for low-level projects.

I am subscribed to Elektuur (the Dutch 'root' magazine of Elektor etc),
but mainly to be able to laugh about how they use PICs. I think the
12-2002 number had a motor alarm with a 16f84, SMD to for small size.
The project could easily be done in a 16F628 (omitting the crystal) or
even a 12F628. The code theys upplied contained no fuses settings and
did not fit the circuit (I contacted the author and he stated that
elektuur had combined an older source with a new circuit). I set up a
website with teh correct software, and a version for 16f628, and
informed the magazine. I never heard from them and my message did not
appear in the 'corrections' pages.

This month they have an controller for model boats or something like
that. The text state that a 16C712 is used instead of the more current
16C84 (!) because it has a PWM output, but the circuit diagram shows a
16F84. I guess they never heard of the 16f628, or of SW PWM. From the
circuit (3 I/O pins used!) this looks like a perfect application for a
12F.

I once connected them about writing an article, but they required
circuit and PCB work to be done in a specific program, which happens to
advertise in the magazine. No way boys.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-request@spam@spamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu>

2003\03\02@141338 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
>   First robotics is not cheap but it is a great program.

http://www.voti.nl/stepbots but use a 16f628 instead of the x84.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-requestRemoveMEspammitvma.mit.edu>

2003\03\02@143249 by Dwayne Reid

flavicon
face
At 11:22 AM 3/2/03 -0600, Dale Botkin wrote:
>On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, William Chops Westfield wrote:
>
>I never did, but their projects very often contributed to mine.
>Fantastic learning tool.  Ciarcia's were always awesome, I still have my
>two Ciarcia's Circuit Cellar books.

Do you also subscribe to Circuit Cellar Ink magazine?  All back issues are
available on CDROM and you can currently subscribe to either / both a print
version or an electronic version (.PDF).  I allowed my print subscription
to lapse - the electronic version is so much less expensive and somewhat
more convenient for me - I keep several issues on my laptop and read as I
have the chance.

BTW - just received the last 2 issues of Nut & Volts.  I'm glad to see that
they have finally gone to a smaller paper format - these issues are no
longer tabloid size, but rather about the same size as the late
Poptronics.  A lot easier to pack around.  Now if only they (N&V) would
start offering an electronic version.

dwayne

--
Dwayne Reid   <.....dwaynerSTOPspamspam@spam@planet.eon.net>
Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd    Edmonton, AB, CANADA
(780) 489-3199 voice          (780) 487-6397 fax

Celebrating 19 years of Engineering Innovation (1984 - 2003)
 .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-
    `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'
Do NOT send unsolicited commercial email to this email address.
This message neither grants consent to receive unsolicited
commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu>

2003\03\02@144111 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
*>The explanation I heard is that it causes you to look at the flash instead
*>of into the lens.  This different angle reduces the light that bounces
*>directly back from your eye.  I'm a little skeptical that such a slight
*>different in eye angle would make a significant difference in the red eye
*>reflection, so this explanation is only slightly more plausible than the
*>one above.

Much better to use a diffuser on the flash. A paper napkin works in a
pinch. Also reduces glare but requires more flash power, which may not be
available.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu>

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2003 , 2004 only
- Today
- New search...