Did you test the repeatability of your set up, i.e., whether you
would get uniform images with repeated exposures on the same media?
This is sort of based on the idea that you know exactly what the
camera DA converter and your software is doing because of variations
in the image regardless of uniform settings.
A more objective test of the media might be to take an image from
your computer and record it on your various media and do a checksum.
If the checksum data is different I would think there might be
something going on. Fresh formatting would be good to map out dead
spots.
Winsor
Who feels virtuous because he deleted the comment on the green magic
marker.
Long Beach, California, USA
On Mar 31, 2007, at 2:58 PM, AG Schnozz wrote:
> The theory is that digital data is digital data and shouldn't be
> effected by the storage media itself as long as all the bits get
> stored. However, as any true audiofile knows, not all CDs or CD
> players are created equal. For example, using a green felt-tip
> marker on the edges of a CD will usually improve the audio quality a
> touch. Before now, I have never seen CF cards compared for image
> fidelity--only speed.
>
> Here is the test setup: Olympus E-1, 14-54, manual exposure, manual
> WB. Lighting is two studio strobes in umbrellas and a filtered 285HV
> behind the subject. Background is black seemless paper. All images
> were processed IDENTICALLY in Olympus Studio version 1.50. There are
> absolutely no differences in image or camera setup between the test
> images. The files were not processed in any editor in any way shape
> or form--these are straight out of Olympus Studio.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|