Those good, old days...

[shadomanda]

While going through my photo CDs to see what else I could add to my collection for future shadomanda posts, I rediscovered some of the photos taken with My First Digicam (a Kodak DC 40 — don't laugh, it was a very nice camera for its time. With less than 1 MP resolution, and an non-removable, non-expandable internal memory that held all of 48 pics, but also a flash, self-timer and tripod mount).

To be honest, all things considered, the photos don't even look that bad. So, in the interest of historical perspective, a couple of shots taken at classic locations. Complete with artefacts and noise, and shown in their original size...



Chrysler building, New York, 1998



Fisherman's Wharf, San Francisco, 2000



Monument Valley, 2000

Comments

[tanaqui]

Interesting to see these!

The (low) resolution really is the main issue, isn't it? Did you have a film camera as well with you, and how did you find the digital pictures came out compared with film?

(Also, you have travelled a LOT. :-D )

[shadomanda]

The low resolution means you don't really have much source material to work with. With bigger sized photos, you can often resize them a bit, sharpen a bit, and they'll look MUCH better, even if the original photo isn't perfect.

Also, there's an amazing amount of noise, and quite a few jpg artefacts. Although that could also be due to having to convert from a camera-specific format (.kdc) to actual jpeg....

As for film.... back then, film made for better quality photos, still. Except I noticed that the prints are degrading, which is something digital will never do.

Also, you have travelled a LOT.

Yeah, back when flying was still fun, and passengers weren't treated like second class citizens while paying through the nose for the privilege...