Digital dandies: Fuji's camera, left,
uses Nikon lenses, while the DCS465 camera
back carries the Kodak name.

Suppliers augment offerings for pixel-based photography

"Nobody told me there'd be days like these."

-- Louis J.M. Daguerre, inventor of the daguerreotype (but actually John Lennon in his song Strange Days)

No one could have conceived the digital photography revolution back in the early days of photography any more than Linotype operators in 1900 could have conceived of the digital processing of text.

Still, whenever the millennium comes, be it 2000 or 2001, its sure to be a digital one for mass-circulation media.

In photography, the digital millennium is closer than ever before. Digital cameras have really taken off in 1997, with models for every budget.

Since you can't do newspaper digital photography on deadline without a digital camera, this discourse is not about digital photography, but the cameras that make it possible. (The reader should know that I am not a professional photographer -- just a professional newsperson who has taken photos that have been published in newspapers.)

Mind you, digital photography remains similar to film-based photography in that it is the process of producing images on a sensitized surface by the action of radiant energy, i.e. light. But the sensitized surface has become a CCD (charged coupled device) or the less costly Cmos (complementary metal oxide semiconductor) rather than photographic film.

All digital cameras mentioned here eliminate scanning and all traditional darkroom work. The higher-end models, and an increasing number of mid-range models, have more than enough resolution (640-by-480 pixels and higher) to produce decent photos for newspapers.

In 1997, the market has seen the introduction of an increasing number of models that are smaller, offer better resolution and are more convenient to use. No one digital camera is the all-around best. Making that selection will depend on an organization's budget, levels of convenience and quality desired.

There's only space here to deal with the high-end field cameras -- mobile ones that don't have to be connected to a computer to take photos.

Space is also going to constrain this report to the cameras offering the highest number of pixels per image. Let's start with two organizations set up to deliver plenty of pixels ... pixels by the uncounted trillions.

Two titans of photography collaborate
Eastman Kodak Co. of Rochester, N.Y., and New York-based Associated Press have been involved in photography for a considerable time.

Eastman Kodak has been synonymous with photography since the first Brownie Camera was introduced in 1888; AP began transmitting photos digitally around the world long before there was an Internet or 33.6 modem technology.

The two companies teamed up with Nikon Inc. of Melville, N.Y., to create the AP News Camera 2000e. Is this a strategic alliance for the 1990s or what?

It's certainly a great leap forward for digital photography, and has received plenty of praise since its introduction in early 1996 as a replacement for the News Camera 2000.

According to the author's unscientific sampling of photographers who have used the 2000e, it is an improvement on every count over the model 2000, with better color, better contrast and correct ISO settings. An ISO number is an indication of the speed at which film (or CCD) reacts to light. The higher the number, the shorter the exposure time to light needed.

High ISO is needed to shoot sports, particularly indoor sports under low-light conditions. The 2000e supports a range of speeds from 200 to 1600, plenty fast enough to freeze any sports action.

But high ISO numbers exacerbate a problem with digital photos not found in film photography --- the blue noise and other digital artifacts generated by the digital photography process. Noise and artifacts increase at higher ISO speeds, and anything above ISO 200 may need a trip to Adobe Photoshop to sharpen up the image and remove the unwanted digital artifacts.

But there is a relatively easy fix using Photoshop. A small company, CameraBits of Portland, Ore., has developed a Photoshop plug-in specifically to reduce the digital noise found in high ISO images. Removal of blue channel noise, color fringing and other quality-degrading artifacts can be done without the filter, but then the process requires a goodly amount of Photoshop expertise.

This one-step filter, with its high, medium and low settings, takes care of these quality problems, as well as the removal of moiré patterns found in certain fabrics and patterns when photographed with some digital cameras. AP includes this filter with its camera, or it can be purchased separately. The filter is cross-platform, so it can be used on Photoshop running on a Macintosh, Windows or Windows NT computer.

The retail price for the 2000e is $15,250, but as with all prices quoted, it may be available for less by the time you read this.

If you'd rather deal with AP as a digital delivery service than a hardware provider, Kodak has several models it markets under its own name, and two models of a digital camera-back for either Hasselblad or Mamiya cameras.

You get the use of all lenses that work with those cameras, but the ISO rating for the back is fixed at 100. You do have more pixels to work with, 3060-by-2036 than you get in the 2000e, 1024-by-1280.

It's also considerably slower on the draw, shooting one image every 12 seconds, rather than the 2.25 frames per second of the 2000e. It's no price slouch either, at $24,495.

And there's still more from Kodak. Wanting to cover nearly all the high-end bases, you can have the top-of-the-line Dcs 460 for $27,995, the more budget-priced Dcs 420 for $10,995, or three models jointly designed by Kodak and Canon.

The Eos Dcs 5 is $11,995, the Eos Dcs 3 is $16,995 and the highest resolution Eos Dcs 1 is $28,995. Combining the digital imaging system from Kodak with a camera body by Canon, the basic difference between these models is the number of pixels per image and ISO speed. The Model 5 has just 1.5 million pixels per image (1012-by-1524), and an ISO equivalent of 100-400 for color and 200-800 for monochrome.

The Model 3 is closest to the 2000e, with an ISO range of 200-1600 and more pixels per image (1268-by-1012). The most expensive Model 1 gives 6 million pixels per image, as does the Dcs 460, along with a single ISO equivalent of 80 (160 for monochrome).

Specifications in common
Before leaving this plethora of choices, it should be noted that all cameras mentioned use standard PC cards (PCMCIA Type III) to store the pictures, so it's a good idea to have a card reader in or attached to the PC being used for image processing (most laptops come configured this way).

All these cameras also take advantage of an internal microphone to record voice annotation to pictures at they are shot, so the PC used for processing should have sound capabilities as well.

All the cameras have AC adapters to go with their batteries, and can work with the Macintosh, Windows 3.1, 95 and NT platforms. And third-party drivers can hook it up to a UNIX-based system; there's a System Software & Solutions Catalog available on the Kodak web site with more information.

No matter what flavor of operating system you are using, the minimum amount of RAM should be 32 megabytes, preferably running on something better than an Intel '386 processor or a Mac II. (Kodak claims that those old machines can work with these digital cameras, as long as the operating system is fairly recent -- System 7.1 for Macs, Windows 3.1 or 95 or NT for PCs.)

(Don't forget, a SCSI adapter is a necessary item for PCs.)

How about the rest? The basic specifications to use any of the other digital cameras are the same, although some mid-range cameras may not need quite as much memory.

But the old rule of thumb is you can never be too thin or too rich, or have too much memory. So 32 megs should be a base when working with any image software no matter what the platform.

Fujifilm (the U.S. subsidiary is Fuji Photo Film U.S.A. Inc. of Elmsford, N.Y.) also has made a digital camera that can use a wide range of lenses from Nikon.

The models DS-515A and DS-505A are similar, but the 515A can shoot a quick three frames per second for seven frames, while the 505A lopes along at one frame per second.

A couple of other smart features about these cameras is the basic compression setting that holds each image to a 160 kilobyte limit, which means faster transmission times from camera to computer. Other settings are hi (no compression), fine, normal (320 K) and the basic.

Even with no compression, each 1280-by-1000-pixel image is still about 2.45 megabytes, but that allows only five images to be stored on the camera's PC card, opposed to the 84 possible when using the basic compression setting.

One other advantage of the two cameras is the built-in Nstc/PAL video out port, which allows the camera to be connected to any television for quick previewing of the pictures, in case a computer isn't handy.

Feel free to plunk down $13,165 for the DS-515A or $10,850 for the DS-505A.

Instant-photo pioneer jumps in
The founder of instant photography, Polaroid Corp. of Cambridge, Mass., didn't want to concede the digital market, so it checks in with three innovative models that are much cheaper than any previously discussed, but don't offer the highest resolution or the variable ISO speeds, either.

The PDC-2000 comes in three models, depending on the amount of storage desired. The cameras are not specifically designed for the newspaper market, but for businesses like insurance companies that want to switch to digital photography without sacrificing quality.

To that end, Polaroid has eschewed storing images in compressed form, and offers PDC-2000 models that can hold either 40 or 60 images. The third model relies on being connected to a computer for image storage, making it a studio version with no field use intended.

Priced at $3695 for the 40-image model, or $4995 for the 60-image version, this camera is far less expensive than previously mentioned models, and still offers a resolution of 1600-by-1200 (about 1000 total pixels).

The 60-image model is only 800-by-600 pixels, but you're not getting as hefty a device. You receive in a two-pound package (about half the weight of the other cameras) the equivalent of a 38mm lens, a flash and all the usual automatic exposure controls of the more expensive cameras. Each image is automatically stamped with the date and time. A SCSI interface transfers images from camera to computer.

The ISO is only 100, which would not make it suitable for shooting athletic events, and the smaller size makes it harder to stabilize without a tripod.

There are only two more entries in the megapixel field, from Agfa, of Wilmington, Mass., and Minolta Corp. of Ramsey, N.J.

Filmmaker Agfa checks in with the $7995 ActionCam. Like the Minolta offering, the ActionCam is based on the Minolta Maxxum 400 autofocus camera body. Each of these cameras can use the full range of Maxxum-compatible lenses, and both capture images at a maximum resolution of 1528-by-1146 pixels.

Minolta's version lists at $9995, which is quite a bit more expensive. Some evaluations pronounce the Minolta software (RDGrabber and a Photoshop plug-in) much better than what comes with the Agfa camera. Whether its better software alone makes Minolta's RD-175 camera worth $2,000 more than the Agfa ActionCam is a question only your pocketbook can answer.

The bottom line: When going digital, be prepared to spend money to get the quality needed for newspaper reproduction in all circumstances. If you are just interested in dabbling a few pixels' worth, perhaps it would be worth getting a less expensive package, such as the one Polaroid sells -- or get one Kodak digital back and trade it around the photo staff.

In any case, as the millennium gets closer, so does the final call for the analog photo. It's not yet the time to totally convert from 35mm film, but it's certainly the right time to publish a few pixels that never saw the inside of a darkroom.

-- George Powell

Associated Press,
(212) 621-1500;
Camera Bits,
(503) 531-8430,
e-mail: dennis@camerabits.com;
Eastman Kodak Co.,
(716) 724-0686;
Fuji Photo Film U.S.A. Inc.,
(914) 789-8100;
Nikon Electronic Imaging,
(516) 547-4355,
e-mail: nikontech@aol.com.

From THE COLE PAPERS, September 1997, Copyright © 1997, All Rights Reserved.