I was hoping you'd make a slideshow of the photos and stick them at the end. I'd like to see what the "low resolution" setting looks like myself. As at "high resolution" the photos are fairly decent and aren't massively pixelated like I was expecting them to be.
Awhile back, I actually got an Apple QuickTake 200 camera to work with my PowerBook 170. Even though the official system requirements for the software were a 68040-based machine with 8MB of RAM, after using TomeViewer to manually extract the installation files, the software actually ran just fine. My PowerBook 170 has a 4MB RAM upgrade (so 8MB instead of 4), and of course a 68030 CPU. I assume you may be able to do something similar on your machine if you wanted to.
Fellow RU-vidr VWestlife has a Sony digital camera of similar vintage that stores photos onto either a 3 1/2" floppies or an 8MB card. The design of digital cameras was first designed in the mid to late 1970's, but companies, like Kodak, didn't start the digital camera until the 1990's for computers, same as standard digital cameras that would've used a CF card as a storage option, but in the late 1990's when USB was an option.
Pretty sure the Apple version was a bit different, and the screen on the back has a different layout and 1 button for each setting rather then the up, down and set buttons.
I laughed until I cried watching your video. As a now retired real estate appraiser, this camera was my first foray into going digital, in other words trying to get out from under the drop off and pick up film Loop at the local pharmacy. I can remember the cursing that I went through trying to get this thing to work too, and to think that I spent $1,000 on it is ridiculous. But back in the day it was so Cutting Edge, all of my fellow appraisers were jealous. Thanks for the Memories.
We used to have one of those! What a blast from the past! I remember the biggest pain was indeed the battery cover was very very tight to open, and IIRC it got worse over time. Since those were such a battery hog, I used to use Lithium batteries (expensive!) since they were able to last enough juice to take enough pictures to fill up maybe half of the 40 or so pictures it could take. It also didn't help that the low light performance was pretty bad compared to today's standards, so you wanted to use the flash, albeit it increased the chance of whiting out parts of the image... Image quality was, as you say, oversaturated in many situations, and it could take best pictures outdoors where the lighting is even. When you take pictures which had light and dark extremes, the light areas would be completely white, while the dark areas would lack the color details.. Also, common with the cameras of the time (pre-USB days!), it required that special proprietary cable to connect it to the PC, and I remember using that PhotoEnhancer software to download the pictures. (Oh, and be sure you have enough battery while you're downloading the images as well!) Surprisingly, there are quite a few photo software out there today which are able to open the KDC files that these cameras created, so I'm still able to take a look at the hundreds of pictures I've taken which this camera, from 1997 to 2000 or so. After writing all of this, I think that these cameras were *much* harder to use than the point-and-shoot cameras we have today, since they actually have optical zoom (the DC40 didn't have *any* form of zoom), have decent low-light capability (I hardly ever use flash these days), and have the storage capacity and short between-shot-recovery times to make ample amounts of mistakes. Oh yes, the DC40 didn't have a LCD, so you I believe *could* delete images from the camera (while in the field, when you start getting low on storage...), but couldn't tell what image you were deleting. And the processing time after the shot was that long, so it was easy to mis-judge when to take the picture, and miss the best time to take it. So, pressing on the shutter button required the same attention as using a film camera...
Inserting batteries I went from icon decypher to polarity reading. Flat end has the minus (-- see it is flat :D) while the bump has the "plus" of battery on top of it. Easy to remember.
nice video. I hope the recovery is going really well man. Something similar happened to me about two years ago. ( except the at-fault driver was drunk and on his 3rd DUI) wish you the best.
14:34 nope, not the only one. I was amazed that the original optical drive in my 2006 24" iMac not only works fine, but also survived two Linux installations.
17:47 I could be wrong but I think your problem is that your mac writes UDF 1.50 while your Windows 98 machine only supports UDF 1.02 unless you have one of those Packet CD tools installed (which may be why it worked on the desktop, man I shouldn't comment while watching...) 19:05: .... and Windows 98 (along with 95 with USB support) were the only two versions which were advertised as USB-ready but lack MSC drivers even on their Install-CDs so you either need a universal mass storage class driver from the net or the original driver which came on CD with the drive to make it work. But I'm sure you know that, is just as a hint if someone else has such problems.
Back in 2001 my first ever digital camera / video recorder was a tiny Aiptek VGA PenCam Trio. It was terrible but I had to start somewhere I suppose! www.dansdata.com/vgapencam.htm
question for every one i have an older HP that uses DDR2 its a socket 478 Pentium 4 the issue im having is every time i install windows weather its xp vista or 7 it runs perfect till you shut it off then when you reboot the machine it gives an error code saying hard drive not found its done this with 10 different drives i even took my hard drive out of my media center pc n it still does the same im at a loss as to what the issue is
Until recently I owned a HP Deskjet 930c which although very, very slow.....it produced excellent photo prints, and the black ink text documents were first class. I use a cheap Canon MG2155 (Costco rebadged MG2150) that I bought in May 2012, and although much faster, the overall quality is not as good in my opinion.
no offense intended but I never really did like IBM I always had a plethora of problems with them that I never got with apple or anything made by dell (just my two cents no disrespect intended) also I love your albino African clawed frogs.
