braddk

<blockquote><em>So who will be the first to hack the thing, slap a serial port on it

and

write software to recover the images. It could be the new digital Holga we've all been

waiting for</em></blockquote>

<p>

That is exactly and the only reason why I would be interested in the camera.

Rob,

That certainly is an interesting comment from Slashdot. $22 seems kinda steep for 25 pictures. Plus, the fact that it's film doesn't make them all that great.

Peter,

I agree with you concerning the logic of this. Until I read the comment at Rob's link, I would have assumed the transfer method is propietary and therefore you would be unable to unload the files at home. However, if it is actually transferred to film (and the method of that baffles me, LCD perhaps?), than processing of some sort is still required.

I agree with you about the logic of them. I personally won't be buying one, considering I use a D60. However, it still seems like an interesting idea. Tough to tell which images are keepers when there is no LCD.

Although, I hate the waste of disposable, especially if they are thrown away. Hopefully Ritz and Walgreens replaces the paper wrapper and resells the electronics.

You can see DPReviews thoughts here:

<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/0307/03073101dakotadigital.asp">http:/

/www.dpreview.com/news/0307/03073101dakotadigital.asp</a>

<p>As an interesting concept, Ritz Camera has decided to release disposable digital

cameras which can hold 25

images. With the purchase of the camera comes:

<ul>

<li>25 4x6 images

<li>PhotoCD of the images

</ul>

<p>

I wonder about the hackability of these cameras and the ability to use one as a cheap

point and shoot digital. Perhaps upload the photos to your own computer rather than

take them to the store. The cameras are stated as being 2 MP, which isn't all that

great, but for $11...

<p>

You can see information about it at: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/31/

technology/circuits/

31digi.html?ex=1060315200&en=49bda513e898e7ea&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE">

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/31/technology/circuits/

31digi.html?ex=1060315200&en=49bda513e898e7ea&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

</a>

Don't buy any of the batteries expecting them to arrive at your door soon though. I

ordered mine a month ago and am still waiting for them. The company I ordered

from on eBay (eForce) posts auctions without having the actual stock.

I just purchased two of those eForce batteries last night off of eBay for the grand ol' price of $9.95. I am taking a trip to New York City and DC in June, so I will do some stress testing there. I am taking a trip to Yellowstone in July and don't particularly want to run out of power while I'm there. May have to purchase an inverter.

I'm still waiting to get my D60 in the mail.

Forgive me for my foolishness. Please see: <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/

q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0052re">a previous post</a> for the answer

Has anyone had experience with the generic batteries available on fleaBay for the

10D/D60/D30 bodies? I recently acquired a D60 and would like to obtain a few more

batteries to suplement the single battery I will have. However, the Canon batteries

are very expensive ($60). The price for batteries that supposedly match the

specifications on that grand auction site are a mere $13-$16.

What do you all think?

After reading your suggestions, I still am pulled towards the Mac. Because the only thing the Mac would be doing is Digital Video, and possibly some graphics editing, support does not seem to me as much an issue. <p>

The reason I feel this way is the use of the machine. Whether a Mac or a PC is used, the person is going to have to learn video editing software, which tends to have a bit of a learning curve. Although using a PC may give them an operating system that they are used to, the video editing software on PCs tend to not be as intuitive as Final Cut Pro. Furthermore, the Mac does have an arguably easy interface to learn.<p>

Another bonus I would see to having a Mac is that I could teach someone how to edit video on iMovie, and then the jump to Final Cut Pro (although a large one), would be much easier than if I sat someone down in front of Avid or Premier and gave them free reign.<p>

Finally, the hardware cost does not seem to be that significant of a difference. In fact, when pricing a dual system with similar requirements from a <a href="http://www.dell.com">prominent manufacturer</a>, the price was actually more for the hardware. Of course, this is because the only Intel manufactured processors in Duals are Xeons. I do not think they will allow me to build the computer myself because of warranty reasons. The software for Mac (FCP) is significantly cheaper as well (educational discounts).<p>

Please give me your thoughts on these issues. I'm going to try to convince my boss that a Mac is the answer, however, he does not have final say on the issue. He must be convinced enough to convince other people.

<p>

Again, thanks in advance,<br>

Brad

My school is in the process of purchasing a single workstation for

Digital Video. We believe we have decided on the Canon XL1S as

camera, however, we are still deciding on hardware.

<p>

Should we use:<br>

<ol>

<li>Power Mac G4 with Final Cut Pro 3 and Adobe After Effects

<li>PC running Windows of some kind (XP or 2K) with Adobe Premier and

After Effects

<li>PC running Windows of some kind (XP or 2K) with Avid Xpress DV and

After Effects

</ol>

<p>

We are using the digital video for everything from taping lectures to

producing PR and recruitment material. What are your suggestions?

<p>

Personally, I prefer the Mac with Final Cut Pro, but my school is

concerned about supporting the Mac. They fear that if I disappear

suddenly, no one will be able to support the system.

<p>

Thanks in advance,

Brad