See that it's not a single pixel, rather a 3x3 group of pixels lit up. 9 physical pixels (27 RGB subpixels) to make a single pixel.
So, yea, 18.7MP display, not 6.3MP.
Still, a firmware update probably is possible to get that resolution - the hardware is already obviously there, otherwise it couldn't drive all of those pixels.
Yep, you're a sucker for failing to realize that those 'more nutritious organics' are in reality DIFFERENT CULTIVARS which were not bred for lower nutritional content in exchange for tougher skin that can withstand mechanical harvest.
Ever notice how organic and heirloom show up very often in the same places? It's the heirloom part, not the organic part, that makes the entire fucking difference.
Do you grow crops for a living? No? You might want to listen to someone that knows better and actually does this GLOBALLY.
But you'd need a micro constant-current driver and a large battery to make that portable. Or rather, with its current construction, you'd need a large battery, and a small power inverter since it has AC plug. 25w would be plenty.
We have plenty, used for LED and micro-plasma fixtures for directional lighting applications for general illumination.
Works just fine, and newer USB microscope cameras are starting to appear with these lenses. I have one tester on loan to me right now. I've never had better visible-range shots of cellular structure for my horticultural studies and job. It makes my job that much easier, especially given I'm only using red and blue light, no green, so no full-color checks.
I could make you an IR LED array, powerful and portable. That's easy as shit to do. What range do you need? (Assuming ~800-1500nm)
We have them. They're powerful, so powerful that I can actually see them when lit up (it's a faint brown color in a pitch black room.)
I could get you a 100w IR floodlight. Hell, given IR photon output per unit of power, probably a 12w LED floodlamp would light up a HUGE swath of area for you. My 12w white LED bulb in my back yard lights up a great area for visible-range as-is.
And it's cheap. Way cheaper than IR filters over visible light.
Plants are capable of making everything they/we need given proper nutrition.
Organic produce is just BS marketing. Go read up on what is considered 'organic' by USDA standards.
Yep, nothing about carbon-chemistry there.
Organics is a sham with the exception of real organic chemistry.
The more nutritious 'organic' foods are really less-modified cultivars rather than production/shelf life/mechanical-harvesting cultivars. This has been the case with every 'organic' farmer I've come across in my travels from UK to China.
It doesn't take a major study to figure this out. Just open your eyes and talk to people.
Signed, Your friendly(ish) horticultural researcher
Dyson Spheres are practically an impossible thing to build. First off, you'd need the energy to build such a system around the star. Secondly, you would need the MATERIALS (and even with Energy-Matter conversion tech, the issue again is energy.) Thirdly, you'd need the TIME.
These three things have been against us for pretty much any project our species has ever attempted, and I would readily assume the same constraints would apply to other civilizations attempting a Dyson Sphere. Given the sheer scale of the project, I would have to say it is nigh impossible.
"Register your business withe the Better Business Bureau"
Hahahahahahahaha NO. That's just a bullshit scam organization like every other one. They tried to threaten me into joining them when I had a cleaning business in Memphis.
Critical thinking is something you lack. If you pay attention to my posting, you'd have seen that I've addressed several things and firmly stated "It's not the camera sensor, it's the fucking software."
Todays green lasers aren't UV based. They work directly from a diode. LED is much more efficient than gas lasers.
The nature of the sapphire plate should allow very minimal light bouncing, nor should the sensors detect IR or UV (pretty much every CMOS/CCD has IR filtering and most glasses and plastics filter UV naturally.)
Considering it's the same camera as the 4S, just a different (superior) lens cover, it's in the software and the blue part of the white balance.
Your simple physics fail to take into account things like silver-coated lenses, which resolve much better than a typical glass lens and thus kicks your diffraction limit to the curb.
The tint is caused by software as sapphire is transparent from 170nm well past 5,000nm - ie all light should be getting through minus the small bit reflected off of the lens/sapphire cover.
If you paid attention to the claims, you'd see that his review is bullshit.
Same fucking sensor as the 4S yet the 4S can't get pictures in the dark? BULLSHIT. I've taken plenty of pics with the 4S at dark places. No issue at all getting clear pics from bands playing in dark bars, catching people in the act of being stupid in my porno shop's very dark arcade, etc.
Critical thinking is important. It's something the 7-digit UID crowd lacks.
"(i.e., you might actually get a picture now, where you just wouldn't with the iPhone 4S"
And they just lost all credibility, as I have zero problems obtaining pictures in low-light with my pals 4S. Sure I get a lot of noise in the truly black areas, but I still get more than a usable picture.
That site is quite obviously getting paid to advertise the I5. Known for not being slanted? A 5 year old can see through this.
Remember, it's the SAME SENSOR as the 4S, just a different lens protector.
You're trying to use an example of additive blending to prove a point about subtractive blending. Sorry pal, doesn't work like that, never has, never will.
Most sensors won't react to IR or UV light because there are other filters (usually built onto the sensor or placed just in front of it) to handle it.
Just disassembled the camera on my ZTE Score (since it died.) Green IR filter right over the sensor (once you remove the fixed-in-place lens,) UV filter laminated on the glass face plate. Tested with my horticultural LEDs and a quantum meter.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, my math went off, too much beer.
Take the monitor, open up paint.
Make a single white pixel on a black background.
Take a microscope to the lit up 'pixel'
See that it's not a single pixel, rather a 3x3 group of pixels lit up. 9 physical pixels (27 RGB subpixels) to make a single pixel.
So, yea, 18.7MP display, not 6.3MP.
Still, a firmware update probably is possible to get that resolution - the hardware is already obviously there, otherwise it couldn't drive all of those pixels.
"but thinks like the iPad 3's screen or the Retina MBP were pretty unrivaled when they were released."
No, my Samsung S-IPS monitor was already 'Retina' well before Retina was ever a buzzword. That was a few years before the iPad.
6.3M physical pixels in a 32" screen. 206 PPI.
Too bad it was stuck at 1920x1080 and not 5760x3240, though I bet a firmware modification could give it that performance.
Yep, you're a sucker for failing to realize that those 'more nutritious organics' are in reality DIFFERENT CULTIVARS which were not bred for lower nutritional content in exchange for tougher skin that can withstand mechanical harvest.
Ever notice how organic and heirloom show up very often in the same places? It's the heirloom part, not the organic part, that makes the entire fucking difference.
Do you grow crops for a living? No? You might want to listen to someone that knows better and actually does this GLOBALLY.
Typical wavelength for IR is around 900-1100nm.
The 10w you linked to probably hits that.
But you'd need a micro constant-current driver and a large battery to make that portable. Or rather, with its current construction, you'd need a large battery, and a small power inverter since it has AC plug. 25w would be plenty.
We have plenty, used for LED and micro-plasma fixtures for directional lighting applications for general illumination.
Works just fine, and newer USB microscope cameras are starting to appear with these lenses. I have one tester on loan to me right now. I've never had better visible-range shots of cellular structure for my horticultural studies and job. It makes my job that much easier, especially given I'm only using red and blue light, no green, so no full-color checks.
I could make you an IR LED array, powerful and portable. That's easy as shit to do. What range do you need? (Assuming ~800-1500nm)
We have them. They're powerful, so powerful that I can actually see them when lit up (it's a faint brown color in a pitch black room.)
I could get you a 100w IR floodlight. Hell, given IR photon output per unit of power, probably a 12w LED floodlamp would light up a HUGE swath of area for you. My 12w white LED bulb in my back yard lights up a great area for visible-range as-is.
And it's cheap. Way cheaper than IR filters over visible light.
Plants are capable of making everything they/we need given proper nutrition.
Organic produce is just BS marketing. Go read up on what is considered 'organic' by USDA standards.
Yep, nothing about carbon-chemistry there.
Organics is a sham with the exception of real organic chemistry.
The more nutritious 'organic' foods are really less-modified cultivars rather than production/shelf life/mechanical-harvesting cultivars. This has been the case with every 'organic' farmer I've come across in my travels from UK to China.
It doesn't take a major study to figure this out. Just open your eyes and talk to people.
Signed,
Your friendly(ish) horticultural researcher
Dyson Spheres are practically an impossible thing to build. First off, you'd need the energy to build such a system around the star. Secondly, you would need the MATERIALS (and even with Energy-Matter conversion tech, the issue again is energy.) Thirdly, you'd need the TIME.
These three things have been against us for pretty much any project our species has ever attempted, and I would readily assume the same constraints would apply to other civilizations attempting a Dyson Sphere. Given the sheer scale of the project, I would have to say it is nigh impossible.
You should see the wavelength availability of LEDs now. Insane.
"Register your business withe the Better Business Bureau"
Hahahahahahahaha NO. That's just a bullshit scam organization like every other one. They tried to threaten me into joining them when I had a cleaning business in Memphis.
Go away, BBB shill.
We quit using ytterbium and started using silicon and sapphire-based diodes with much much higher efficiencies.
We don't even need to do the frequency doubling any longer, we can make native green laser diodes with the advances we have in fab.
Critical thinking is something you lack. If you pay attention to my posting, you'd have seen that I've addressed several things and firmly stated "It's not the camera sensor, it's the fucking software."
Try again when you can PAY ATTENTION.
popphoto doesn't know what it's talking about.
Ahem...
http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/12/apple-details-iphone-5s-new-camera-8mp-same-as-iphone-4s-but/ [engadget.com]
http://www.iphonehacks.com/2012/09/iphone-5-vs-iphone-4s-camera-image-quality-comparison.html [iphonehacks.com]
http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/ [apple.com]
Every fucking link I find has Apple saying "Same camera sensor, just thinner."
Are you insinuating that Apple is lying about what is inside its phone?
Ahem...
http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/12/apple-details-iphone-5s-new-camera-8mp-same-as-iphone-4s-but/
http://www.iphonehacks.com/2012/09/iphone-5-vs-iphone-4s-camera-image-quality-comparison.html
http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/
Every fucking link I find has Apple saying "Same camera sensor, just thinner."
Try again.
Todays green lasers aren't UV based. They work directly from a diode. LED is much more efficient than gas lasers.
The nature of the sapphire plate should allow very minimal light bouncing, nor should the sensors detect IR or UV (pretty much every CMOS/CCD has IR filtering and most glasses and plastics filter UV naturally.)
Considering it's the same camera as the 4S, just a different (superior) lens cover, it's in the software and the blue part of the white balance.
Apparently you don't know about different color temperatures of white.
What I propose would bring it to roughly 5600K white. Not cyan.
Failure on your part.
"Where are these PC laptops with superior IPS screens?"
Vaio SE? Zenbook Prime? Are you even paying attention to a market that released this stuff like LAST YEAR?
Your simple physics fail to take into account things like silver-coated lenses, which resolve much better than a typical glass lens and thus kicks your diffraction limit to the curb.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superlens
The tint is caused by software as sapphire is transparent from 170nm well past 5,000nm - ie all light should be getting through minus the small bit reflected off of the lens/sapphire cover.
If you paid attention to the claims, you'd see that his review is bullshit.
Same fucking sensor as the 4S yet the 4S can't get pictures in the dark? BULLSHIT. I've taken plenty of pics with the 4S at dark places. No issue at all getting clear pics from bands playing in dark bars, catching people in the act of being stupid in my porno shop's very dark arcade, etc.
Critical thinking is important. It's something the 7-digit UID crowd lacks.
"(i.e., you might actually get a picture now, where you just wouldn't with the iPhone 4S"
And they just lost all credibility, as I have zero problems obtaining pictures in low-light with my pals 4S. Sure I get a lot of noise in the truly black areas, but I still get more than a usable picture.
That site is quite obviously getting paid to advertise the I5. Known for not being slanted? A 5 year old can see through this.
Remember, it's the SAME SENSOR as the 4S, just a different lens protector.
Quit drinking the kool-aid.
"Until they add no returns to their standard EULA,"
And Apple would get the shit slapped out of them for violating the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act.
Add green and drop the red.
Oh, wait, you don't know how to work with additive or subtractive color blending, do you?
Oh, you had to post as AC. Well, it's to be expected, you're dead wrong, after all.
You're trying to use an example of additive blending to prove a point about subtractive blending. Sorry pal, doesn't work like that, never has, never will.
Most sensors won't react to IR or UV light because there are other filters (usually built onto the sensor or placed just in front of it) to handle it.
Just disassembled the camera on my ZTE Score (since it died.) Green IR filter right over the sensor (once you remove the fixed-in-place lens,) UV filter laminated on the glass face plate. Tested with my horticultural LEDs and a quantum meter.