August 25, 2003 (AP)
Scientists Say Subatomic Particles Damaged by Use in Digital Photography

Researchers at Eastman Kodak announce discovery of a disturbing phenomenon
that may mean the eventual end of digital photography as it is presently
known.

Dr. Steven Bowman of the Curtis Advanced Labs division of Kodak tells
reporters that the unique handling of electrons made necessary by digital
photography actually damages those particles such that they gradually lose
their ability to convey color. As this occurs, says Dr. Bowman, storage
media casts off the damaged electrons and draws electrons from surrounding
materials - including the photographer - to continue functioning.

"The eventual result will be that not only is there a net loss of functional
matter in the universe, but what is left will be less colorful, less
vibrant," Dr. Bowman warns. "When cameras commonly capture 20 megapixels (a
standard of resolution) or more, the damage process seems to increase
exponentially, such that digital cameras may observably damage the fabric of
the known universe within our lifetimes. First we will notice a loss of
color in digital photographs. Then it will seem to spread to print media.
Eventually we ourselves will lose the ability to see color. From then on,
all color will be drained from personalities, localities, and we will live
in a black-and-white-world. The universe may stabilize in a B&W state,
although present research is inconclusive."

Dr. Bowman says that there may be one possible benefit of the phenomenon:
Early adopters of high-resolution digital photography also tend to drive
SUVs and other large and expensive cars. "We predict that, as these
photographers carry their cameras and storage media around in their
vehicles, they will draw electrons from the, making them potentially ligher
and more fuel efficient."

However, Dr. Bowman also observes that the damaged electrons are likely to
rise in the atmosphere and become assimiltated by the ozone layer.

"The altered ozone has no ultraviolet shielding properties, which of course
is bad. Worse is that it is more stable than normal ozone - once displaced
by damaged ozone, normal ozone is unlikely to be created in the upper
atmosphere. Altered ozone also has greatly enhanced heat-storage and
reflective properties. In other words, if we continue taking digital
pictures, we're toast."

In article eFC2b.262624$Ho3.35079@sccrnsc03,
"=\\^.^/= @\)\) catfish, creeping, creeping......."
wrote:

August 25, 2003 (AP)
Scientists Say Subatomic Particles Damaged by Use in Digital Photography


Should have been dated April 1

--
free men own guns - slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/

On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 05:57:35 GMT, "=\\^.^/= @\)\) catfish,
creeping, creeping......." pixelated:

August 25, 2003 (AP)
Scientists Say Subatomic Particles Damaged by Use in Digital Photography

Researchers at Eastman Kodak announce discovery of a disturbing phenomenon
that may mean the eventual end of digital photography as it is presently
known.

Dr. Steven Bowman of the Curtis Advanced Labs division of Kodak tells
reporters that the unique handling of electrons made necessary by digital
photography actually damages those particles such that they gradually lose
their ability to convey color. As this occurs, says Dr. Bowman, storage
media casts off the damaged electrons and draws electrons from surrounding
materials - including the photographer - to continue functioning.

"The eventual result will be that not only is there a net loss of functional
matter in the universe, but what is left will be less colorful, less
vibrant," Dr. Bowman warns. "When cameras commonly capture 20 megapixels (a

Holy Shades of Pleasantville, Batman! This is seriouso!
I suppose that tinfoil caps will become the norm as the
ozone layer is decolorized, eh?

For sale:

Complete 18" Tinfoil Hatmaking System, now only $14,699!
Cut, form, roll beads, and make perfect flanges with one bench top
tool. Saves money and shop space. Comes with 1/4'', 3/8'', and 1/2''
bead mandrels; 1/16'', 1/8'', and 1/4'' flange mandrels; and one
18-1/4'' shearing mandrel. Large 18" capacity ensures that you
will be able to fit even the most arrogant city officials with
a form-fitting cap.

Free shipping with orders of 2 or more systems!
Buy NOW!

-
- Let Exxon send their own troops -
-------------------------------------------------------
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Programming

Just what I was thinking....Pleasantville...only in reverse.
Hey, here's an idea...we'll all go back to film. Then we'll ship all the
digital cameras to Iraq. Need I say more?
BigJoe


--
Be sure to check out Joe's and Betty's webpages...
http://www.angelfire.com/jazz/kb8qlrjoe/index.html
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 05:57:35 GMT, "=\\^.^/= @\)\) catfish,
creeping, creeping......." pixelated:

August 25, 2003 (AP)
Scientists Say Subatomic Particles Damaged by Use in Digital Photography

Researchers at Eastman Kodak announce discovery of a disturbing
phenomenon
that may mean the eventual end of digital photography as it is presently
known.

Dr. Steven Bowman of the Curtis Advanced Labs division of Kodak tells
reporters that the unique handling of electrons made necessary by digital
photography actually damages those particles such that they gradually
lose
their ability to convey color. As this occurs, says Dr. Bowman, storage
media casts off the damaged electrons and draws electrons from
surrounding
materials - including the photographer - to continue functioning.

"The eventual result will be that not only is there a net loss of
functional
matter in the universe, but what is left will be less colorful, less
vibrant," Dr. Bowman warns. "When cameras commonly capture 20 megapixels
(a

Holy Shades of Pleasantville, Batman! This is seriouso!
I suppose that tinfoil caps will become the norm as the
ozone layer is decolorized, eh?

For sale:

Complete 18" Tinfoil Hatmaking System, now only $14,699!
Cut, form, roll beads, and make perfect flanges with one bench top
tool. Saves money and shop space. Comes with 1/4'', 3/8'', and 1/2''
bead mandrels; 1/16'', 1/8'', and 1/4'' flange mandrels; and one
18-1/4'' shearing mandrel. Large 18" capacity ensures that you
will be able to fit even the most arrogant city officials with
a form-fitting cap.

Free shipping with orders of 2 or more systems!
Buy NOW!

-
- Let Exxon send their own troops -
-------------------------------------------------------
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Programming

BigJoe wrote in message ...
Just what I was thinking....Pleasantville...only in reverse.
Hey, here's an idea...we'll all go back to film. Then we'll ship all the
digital cameras to Iraq. Need I say more?
BigJoe


According to the government, everything over there is already pretty black
and
white.

Paul K. Dickman

Why do I get the feeling that this problem isn't being taken seriously?? It
won't be so funny when all the Miss Machine Tool calendars are in black and
white!

Just a little levity to punctuate the discussion. Hope noboby minds...


"=\^.^/= @)) catfish, creeping, creeping......." wrote in
message news:eFC2b.262624$Ho3.35079@sccrnsc03...
August 25, 2003 (AP)
Scientists Say Subatomic Particles Damaged by Use in Digital Photography

Researchers at Eastman Kodak announce discovery of a disturbing phenomenon
that may mean the eventual end of digital photography as it is presently
known.

Dr. Steven Bowman of the Curtis Advanced Labs division of Kodak tells
reporters that the unique handling of electrons made necessary by digital
photography actually damages those particles such that they gradually lose
their ability to convey color. As this occurs, says Dr. Bowman, storage
media casts off the damaged electrons and draws electrons from surrounding
materials - including the photographer - to continue functioning.

"The eventual result will be that not only is there a net loss of
functional
matter in the universe, but what is left will be less colorful, less
vibrant," Dr. Bowman warns. "When cameras commonly capture 20 megapixels
(a
standard of resolution) or more, the damage process seems to increase
exponentially, such that digital cameras may observably damage the fabric
of
the known universe within our lifetimes. First we will notice a loss of
color in digital photographs. Then it will seem to spread to print media.
Eventually we ourselves will lose the ability to see color. From then on,
all color will be drained from personalities, localities, and we will live
in a black-and-white-world. The universe may stabilize in a B&W state,
although present research is inconclusive."

Dr. Bowman says that there may be one possible benefit of the phenomenon:
Early adopters of high-resolution digital photography also tend to drive
SUVs and other large and expensive cars. "We predict that, as these
photographers carry their cameras and storage media around in their
vehicles, they will draw electrons from the, making them potentially
ligher
and more fuel efficient."

However, Dr. Bowman also observes that the damaged electrons are likely to
rise in the atmosphere and become assimiltated by the ozone layer.

"The altered ozone has no ultraviolet shielding properties, which of
course
is bad. Worse is that it is more stable than normal ozone - once displaced
by damaged ozone, normal ozone is unlikely to be created in the upper
atmosphere. Altered ozone also has greatly enhanced heat-storage and
reflective properties. In other words, if we continue taking digital
pictures, we're toast."

Yeah, Eastman would like it if digital photography would
just go away. For them, it's like what the automobile did
for wagon makers.
JR
Dweller in the cellar

"=\\^.^/= @)) catfish, creeping, creeping......." wrote:

August 25, 2003 (AP)
Scientists Say Subatomic Particles Damaged by Use in Digital Photography

Researchers at Eastman Kodak announce discovery of a disturbing phenomenon
that may mean the eventual end of digital photography as it is presently
known.

Dr. Steven Bowman of the Curtis Advanced Labs division of Kodak tells
reporters that the unique handling of electrons made necessary by digital
photography actually damages those particles such that they gradually lose
their ability to convey color. As this occurs, says Dr. Bowman, storage
media casts off the damaged electrons and draws electrons from surrounding
materials - including the photographer - to continue functioning.

"The eventual result will be that not only is there a net loss of functional
matter in the universe, but what is left will be less colorful, less
vibrant," Dr. Bowman warns. "When cameras commonly capture 20 megapixels (a
standard of resolution) or more, the damage process seems to increase
exponentially, such that digital cameras may observably damage the fabric of
the known universe within our lifetimes. First we will notice a loss of
color in digital photographs. Then it will seem to spread to print media.
Eventually we ourselves will lose the ability to see color. From then on,
all color will be drained from personalities, localities, and we will live
in a black-and-white-world. The universe may stabilize in a B&W state,
although present research is inconclusive."

Dr. Bowman says that there may be one possible benefit of the phenomenon:
Early adopters of high-resolution digital photography also tend to drive
SUVs and other large and expensive cars. "We predict that, as these
photographers carry their cameras and storage media around in their
vehicles, they will draw electrons from the, making them potentially ligher
and more fuel efficient."

However, Dr. Bowman also observes that the damaged electrons are likely to
rise in the atmosphere and become assimiltated by the ozone layer.

"The altered ozone has no ultraviolet shielding properties, which of course
is bad. Worse is that it is more stable than normal ozone - once displaced
by damaged ozone, normal ozone is unlikely to be created in the upper
atmosphere. Altered ozone also has greatly enhanced heat-storage and
reflective properties. In other words, if we continue taking digital
pictures, we're toast."

--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
If you're not the lead dog, the view never changes
Doubt yourself, and the real world will eat you alive
The world doesn't revolve around you, it revolves around me
No skeletons in the closet; just decomposing corpses
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dependence is Vulnerability:
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Open the Pod Bay Doors please, Hal"
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.."

Yeah, Eastman would like it if digital photography would
just go away. For them, it's like what the automobile did
for wagon makers.

....although Kodak's top-of-the-line digital SLR is one of the best and most
popular pro models on the market.

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 08:46:39 GMT, "=\\^.^/= @\)\) catfish, creeping, creeping......." wrote:
Yeah, Eastman would like it if digital photography would
just go away. For them, it's like what the automobile did
for wagon makers.

...although Kodak's top-of-the-line digital SLR is one of the best and most
popular pro models on the market.

But it isn't nearly the moneymaker that selling film was, and Kodak
doesn't dominate the camera market the way it dominated the film
market. Kodak's photographic business was built on the Gillette
model. Cameras are a one time purchase, film is a continuing
one. They made their money on the film.

Kodak was very good at making film. Even if they're also very good
at making digital cameras, they aren't going to be able to dominate
that market the same way, or make the same sort of money they
made selling film, chemicals, paper, and franchised processing.

Look at how quickly the magnetic tape business is drying up. In a
few more years, it'll mostly be gone, and along with it the companies
whose expertise was in making it. Ampex is basically gone, 3M and
Maxell's tape businesses are hanging on by a thread. The same
thing is happening with the photographic film business.

Gary

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 22:40:18 +0800, Ian W wrote:
Given that it was Kodak (aka Eastman) who developed the first one shot
colour CCD camera for general photographic purposes plus the first 1
megapixel ccd (1987) and who pushed hard for the development of digital
processing and photography I'd suggest you're off track here.

Considering that Sony was already marketing professional CCD video
cameras by then, Kodak was making a survival move by jumping on the
CCD camera bandwagon. It was obvious even then that photography
was going to go digital, and given Moore's Law, it was going to get as
good as film in a hurry.

But Kodak is never going to dominate digital photography the way it
did film photography. There are too many players, and too many of
them have greater experience than Kodak in producing and marketing
digital electronics.

Gary

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 11:28:01 -0400, the renowned Gary Coffman
wrote:

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 22:40:18 +0800, Ian W wrote:
Given that it was Kodak (aka Eastman) who developed the first one shot
colour CCD camera for general photographic purposes plus the first 1
megapixel ccd (1987) and who pushed hard for the development of digital
processing and photography I'd suggest you're off track here.

Considering that Sony was already marketing professional CCD video
cameras by then, Kodak was making a survival move by jumping on the
CCD camera bandwagon. It was obvious even then that photography
was going to go digital, and given Moore's Law, it was going to get as
good as film in a hurry.

But Kodak is never going to dominate digital photography the way it
did film photography. There are too many players, and too many of
them have greater experience than Kodak in producing and marketing
digital electronics.

Does Kodak produce their own consumer-level CCD (or CMOS) cameras?
AFAIUI, my older one was designed and manufactured for Kodak by a
Japanese company (Chinon).

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

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 15:40:58 GMT, Spehro Pefhany wrote:
Does Kodak produce their own consumer-level CCD (or CMOS) cameras?
AFAIUI, my older one was designed and manufactured for Kodak by a
Japanese company (Chinon).

They certainly manufacture their own CCDs. See he
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/digit...sorsMain.jhtml

That makes them a semiconductor fab house, with all the market
risks that implies.

Gary

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 11:52:17 -0400, the renowned Gary Coffman
wrote:

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 15:40:58 GMT, Spehro Pefhany wrote:
Does Kodak produce their own consumer-level CCD (or CMOS) cameras?
AFAIUI, my older one was designed and manufactured for Kodak by a
Japanese company (Chinon).

They certainly manufacture their own CCDs. See he
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/digit...sorsMain.jhtml

That makes them a semiconductor fab house, with all the market
risks that implies.

They've long been at the forefront of ultra-high-resolution (and very
expensive) sensors for professional digital cameras as well as
scientific and military applications. I don't know how their market
share is at the consumer end.

Their KAF-22000CE has over 22 million pixels!
http://www.kodak.com/global/plugins/...CELongSpec.pdf

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

...although Kodak's top-of-the-line digital SLR is one of the best and
most
popular pro models on the market.

But it isn't nearly the moneymaker that selling film was, and Kodak
doesn't dominate the camera market the way it dominated the film
market.

Granted that the film business is not going to return, and Kodak won't
dominate the digital consumer photo market as they have. But they've made a
lot of money over the years and ploughed some of it into what became a
lifesaving move to develop cutting digital technology development
capabilities, which will have very profitable military and scientific
applications. I wouldn't buy their stock, but they clearly learned from
their mistakes Fuji and they certainly will survive.

In article ,
Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 11:28:01 -0400, the renowned Gary Coffman
wrote:

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 22:40:18 +0800, Ian W wrote:
Given that it was Kodak (aka Eastman) who developed the first one shot
colour CCD camera for general photographic purposes plus the first 1

[ ... ]

Does Kodak produce their own consumer-level CCD (or CMOS) cameras?
AFAIUI, my older one was designed and manufactured for Kodak by a
Japanese company (Chinon).

I've got a camera which was produced by Kodak modifying a Nikon
N90s film camera body to accept a digital focal plane. It was made for
the AP (Associated Press), with the model number NC2000e-c, and was an
early megapixel camera which could use the lenses and accessories for
the Nikon camera line, thus preserving a major investment in optical
glass.

They've also produced similar conversions based on the Cannon
line of cameras.

Now -- both manufacturers are making their own digital cameras
with much higher resolution -- but Kodak is not sitting still, either.
They also make digital backs for the Hasselblad series of cameras with
even more pixels.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 02:51:21 GMT, the renowned "Leo Lichtman"
wrote:

If you want to feel sorry for someone, how about Polariod? They had they
process stolen from them by Kodak. Eventually, the won a lawsuit, which
really hurt Kodak (they deserved it), but the long term benefits are gone,
due to digital photography. How long since you have seen someone count to
ten, and then peel off the sloppy negative, or stand there waiting to see
whether the $1 color shot is going to have to be reshot?

Last time I got a passport photo. But it's almost all digital now,
including Costco ID cards, Drivers licen[cs]es etc.

Then, on top of that, Polaroid was just marketing a rather clumsy instant
movie film when VCR's came along.

They re-aimed a lot of stuff for scientific, medical and industrial
uses, which bought them some time, but they've still been having
problems. Their unique SX-70 sonar ranging innovation spawned an
ultrasonic transducer division.

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

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 02:56:32 GMT, the renowned
(John Flanagan) wrote:

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 19:00:51 GMT, (John
Flanagan) wrote:

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:30:47 GMT, Spehro Pefhany
wrote:


Their KAF-22000CE has over 22 million pixels!
http://www.kodak.com/global/plugins/...CELongSpec.pdf

Now they're starting to talk serious digital film :^). I wonder how
much this sensor costs? I also noted they say the pixels have either
red, green or blue filters over them to produce color. Sort of like
the color TVs with three different colored pixels per "pixel". I
guess the true resolution should really be 22 million divided by
three?

Don't question how the masters of marketing determine the number of
pixels. ;-)

I asked Kodak. Full Spec Photography grade - $14,900.00. Engineering
sample with bad pixels - $1000.00.

Note that the "full spec" devices can have quite a few bad pixels too,
4,000 or so, IIRC.

A bit pricey plus it takes the chip 2.5 seconds to off load the image
to memory.

I'd like to find one with low (maybe 250 x 250 resolution) that could
do 25,000 frames/second. That would almost catch up with what we could
do in 1969 using star tracker tubes.

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

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 11:20:19 GMT, Spehro Pefhany
wrote:

I'd like to find one with low (maybe 250 x 250 resolution) that could
do 25,000 frames/second. That would almost catch up with what we could
do in 1969 using star tracker tubes.

What was that, some sort of vidicon type tube? Yea that would be
great, high speed digital photography. It'd be cheap (probably) if
there was a chip that went that fast.

John

Please note that my return address is wrong due to the amount of junk email I get.
So please respond to this message through the newsgroup.