-
Xbox 360 Problems – The Most Common Cause
Posted on September 16th, 2009 No commentsMicrosoft’s Xbox 360 is a great piece of gear, there is no doubt about that. The amount of computing power housed in that little box is more than what your average personal computer had not so long ago and of course this can be seen in the quality of the graphics and the complexity of the game play. All of this computing power does have a by-product though and unfortunately this can have an adverse affect on machines.
The by-product that I am talking about is heat, and it is the enemy of these gaming consoles. Whether it be put down to a design fault or the placement of the machine when in use, they have trouble in effectively dissipating the built up heat which can have a detrimental affect on the hardware. Often the dreaded ‘red ring of death’ is caused by heat build up, sometimes even after a short gaming session.
The ‘dreaded red ring of death’ is when the lights on the front of the console, which are normally green, turn to red. The number of red lights showing can give you an indication as to the nature of the problem and possible causes. The best situation to have is all four segments of the light showing red as this indicates a disconnected AV cable. Turning the power off and reconnecting the AV cable is all that is needed to solve that one.
Having three or one red light showing is what you don’t want as this indicates a hardware failure, which is quite often attributed to a build up of heat that has affected the internal components such as the motherboard. It is quite possible that switching the unit off and letting it cool down for a reasonable period of time may return it back to normal, however this is not always the case and often further inspection and repairs are needed.
If your machine is out of warranty, and given that the original warranty only covered the first ninety days, there is a good chance that you will be able to repair it yourself with the right information. There is no need to send the console off for repair and wait weeks for it to return and pay through the nose for something that should not have happened in the first place. The frustration of having the machine play up in the first place is only compounded when you are forced to wait weeks for your console to be returned and as documented throughout the net there is no guarantee that it will be one hundred percent when it comes back anyway!
Take matters in to your own hands and check out the range of DIY Xbox Repair Guides and save both time and money!
-
The differences between Film and Digital Photography.
Posted on September 16th, 2009 No commentsSpatial Resolution
Numerous measures can be used to assess the quality of still images the most discussed being the pixel count, presumed to correlate with spatial resolution. This is measured by the quantity of picture elements (pixels) in the image sensor, usually counted in millions and called “megapixels”. Measuring the resolution of both film and digital photographs involves numerous issues.
Similarly, digital cameras have a variable relationship of resolution to megapixel count; other factors are significant in digital camera resolution, such as the number of pixels used to resolve the image, the effect of the Bayer pattern or other sensor filters on the digital sensor and the image processing algorithm used to interpolate sensor pixels to image pixels. In addition, digital sensors are typically arranged in a rectangular grid pattern, making images susceptible to stripped pattern artefacts, whereas film is not affected by this because of the random orientation of grains.
Estimates Approximations of a picture’s resolution taken with a 35 mm film camera vary. Additional information may be recorded if a finer grain film and or developer are used. Conversely, less resolution may be recorded with poor quality optics or with coarser-grained film. A 36 mm x 24 mm frame of ISO 100-speed film is estimated to contain the equivalent of 20 million pixels.
The working commercial photographer would often opt for the use of a higher quality product being that in the medium format or large format films. Because of the size of the imaging area, they have higher resolution than the current top-of-the-range digital cameras. It is estimated that a medium format film image can record around 50 megapixels, while large format films can record around 200 megapixels (4 × 5 inch) which would equate to around 800 megapixels on the largest common film format, 8 × 10 inches, without taking into account lens sharpness. A medium format DSLRs provides from 42 to 50 megapixels, which is relatively similar quality to the medium format film quality.
When choosing between film and digital and between different types of camera, it is necessary to think about the medium which will be used for display and the viewing distance. For instance, if a photograph will only be viewed on a TV or VDU, (which can resolve only about 0.3 megapixels and 1-2 megapixels, respectively, as of 2008. HD sets of 1080p are around 2.07mp), then the resolution provided by a very low-end digital cameras may be sufficient. Print mediums work to far greater qualities of around 300 dots per inch (dpi).
Noise and Grain
Thermal noise is a condition that degrades shadow areas of electronic images with random pixels of a different colour. Film grain becomes obvious in areas of even and delicate tone. Grain and film sensitivity are linked, with more sensitive films having more obvious grain. Likewise, when used at high sensitivity settings, digital camera pictures show more noise than those made at lower sensitivities.
The level at which current technology stands at produces random noise to the images taken by digital cameras, produced by heat and manufacturing defects. For very long exposures it is necessary to operate the image sensor at low temperatures to avoid noise impacting the final image. Film grain for visible light is not affected by exposure time, although the apparent speed of the film does change with longer exposures, a phenomenon known as reciprocity failure.
Dynamic Range
The topic of dynamic range (DR) is complicated. Comparisons between film and digital media should consider:
- What film? For example, low-contrast print film has greater DR than slide film’s low DR and richer gradation in recorded tones.
- What film format? Larger formats record larger images, so grain is less detectable at film’s limits of exposure and images require less enlargement for a given image size.
- Which size sensor? As with film, smaller sensors produce smaller images which require greater degrees of enlargement for a given image size. The more convenient pocket digicams use smaller sensors than professional-quality cameras.
- What scanner? Variations in optics, sensor resolution, scanner DR and precision of the analogue to digital conversion circuit cause variations in image quality.
- What counts as image and what is noise? This question defines the limits of DR within a single photograph, and may vary with subject matter.
- Increased depth of field;
- Decreased light sensitivity and increased pixel noise;
- For digital SLRs, cropping of the field of view when using lenses designed for 35 mm camera;
- Lenses may be smaller because they only need to project their image onto a smaller area;
- Increased degree of enlargement of the final image.
-
Here are some other KEY things about the compensation plan at Go GVO..
Posted on September 16th, 2009 No comments- Go GVO 2×10 forced matrix (meaning people in your upline OR your downline may contribute to your overall income as they refer more and more people)
- 5% commission on EACH of the 10 levels. A full matrix is 2046 people, or over $4,500 per month if every person is on the LOWEST price-point product package — and if you didn’t refer ANY of them. If you referred some of them, you earn 20% of what your referrals earn too (matching bonuses). This is in addition to your normal matrix commissions.
- For every 14 Titanium members in your organization, you get another position in the matrix. You can save these up in a pool and use them (position them) where you want to and WHEN you want to.
This is great, for instance, if you want to put one of these “bonus” positions directly under a heavy-hitter you refer, or if you want to use it as incentive by placing it under a friend or family member and then start building it so you build your income AND theirs, or rewarding a hard-working member in your group by placing one of your bonus positions under them.
And ah… this is KILLER. If you’re really going to get cranking and promoting , you will LOVE this. Each month, GVO will put 10% of company net profits into a bonus pool. I don’t know that it has an official name yet, but we’ll call it the heavy hitter bonus pool for now.
The TOP 20 referrers each month will share in this pool equally.
NOT the top earners, but the 20 people with the most personal referrals for that month — so even someone BRAND NEW to the company could potentially hit on this bonus their first month.
I can’t make promises about the size of this pool or what the bonus to each qualifying affiliate will be, but I can imagine it getting VERY big, VERY fast based on what I’ve seen already.
For an easy hypothetical example, if Go GVO has net profits of $1 MILLION in a month, then the bonus pool for that month is $100,000, which is split equally by 20 people who referred the most new members for the month.
That’s $5K in addition to your normal fast starts, matrix commissions, and matching bonuses. If you can’t tell by this email that I’m excited, just wait until you see the video.
Believe me, although I can’t talk about it — it’s exciting and will mean even MORE income to you.
I’m telling you folks… I’m pumped. If you’re not, check your pulse — there’s probably something wrong with you the Go GVO.
Alan Chapman
-
Add Value to Your Home With Window Blinds and How to Shop For Them Online
Posted on September 16th, 2009 No commentsYour windows are generally meant to let in light into the home or to let you take a peek on what’s outside and in your immediate surroundings but despite this you still need them covered occasionally. Interior shutters aid in this task by providing cover while also helping to regulate the ventilation and lighting especially in areas such as kitchens and bathrooms which require this sort of thing. These blinds also lets the user keep his or her privacy so what’s inside your house will be concealed. Blinds are also more long lasting and easier to manage than other forms of window covering such as curtains and drapes.
Roman blinds are usually purchased by people who want to conserve space. These blinds are usually made from different sorts of materials depending on what brand that the customer purchased. Some blinds are more costly than others because some brands are more well known as compared to others. These blinds can help you keep your privacy, and to beautify the room itself. Blinds are more useful than drapes and curtains and can often be morre flexible in their presentation and use.
Some wonder why people choose wood blinds rather than electing to buy drapes or curtains. The reason mostly is that these blinds are easy on the budget, more long lasting and easy to maintain. They are mostly synthentic and lend themselves well to cleaning and are not susceptible to damage by insects such as termites.
These varying sorts of blinds can be purchased online from a number of retailers. Buying online is a lot more convenient than going to the store by yourself because the items can be bought without having to physically visit and spend an excruciating period of time figuring out which type of blinds would you want. By accomplishing you task online, you can easily decide when it comes to style and design by just sitting in a chair and browsing the website of the relevant online store.
By buying your blinds on the internet, you get a lot of opportunities in terms of pricing as far as your choice of the type of blinds that suits your taste. Online stores give you the time required to make the selections that you want as well as a number of other advantages.
Just one comparison cannot demonstrate that digital or film has a smaller or greater dynamic range. Some amateur authors have performed tests with inconclusive results. R. N. Clark, comparing a professional digital camera with 35 mm film, reached the conclusion that – Digital cameras, like the Canon 1D Mark II, show a huge dynamic range compared to either print or slide film, at least for the films compared.
Ken Rockwell comes to a different conclusion: “CCDs and the related capture electronics will need about ten times more dynamic range (three stops) than they have today to be able to simulate film’s shoulder….This is the biggest image defect in digital cameras today.”
Some CCDs like Fujifilm’s Super CCD combines photosites of different sizes to give increased dynamic range. Other manufacturers use in-camera software to prevent highlight overexposure. Nikon calls this feature D-Lighting.
Effects of Sensor Size
The majority of digital SLR camera and all consumer compacts have sensors that are reduced to smaller than a 36 mm x 24 mm frame of 35 mm film. This affects aspects of the captured photograph and the way the camera is used. These effects include:
The depth of field of a digital camera and lens set up increases as the imaging area decreases, for a given f-number. This may have plusses for consumer compact digital cameras since they are intended for taking snapshots. More of the image will be in focus than with a larger sensor and the autofocus system does not need to be as accurate to produce an acceptable image. Conversely, photographers often limit the depth of field to create certain effects, such as isolating a subject from its background. Cameras with imaging areas smaller than 36 mm x 24 mm require a wider aperture on the lens to achieve the same degree of selective focusing.
Pixel size is related to both light sensitivity and pixel noise, which is in turn related to sensor size and resolution. As the resolution of sensors increase, the size of the individual pixels has to decrease. This smaller pixel size means that each one collects less light and the resulting signal is amplified more to produce the final value. This also amplifies any noise. With a smaller signal, the signal-to-noise ratio decreases. More noise is present in the image and the higher noise floor means that less useful information is extracted from the darker parts of the image.
Several digital SLRs are able to use lens mounts originally designed for film cameras. If the camera has a smaller imaging area than the lens’ intended film frame, its field of view is cropped. This crop factor is often called a “focal length multiplier” because the effect can be calculated by multiplying the focal length of the lens. For lenses that are not designed for a smaller imaging area whilst using the 35 mm-compatible lens mount, this has the beneficial side effect of only using the centre part of the lens, where the image quality is in some aspects higher.
More often expensive digital SLRs have full-frame sensors that are 36mm × 24 mm, which eliminate depth of field and crop factor problems when compared to 35 mm film cameras.
The smaller sensor size of consumer compact means that prints are a massive enlargement of the original photograph and that the lens must perform well in order to provide enough resolution to match the tiny pixels on the sensor. Most digital compacts have sensors that exceed the maximum resolution that the lens is capable of delivering. Increased sensor resolution may even have a negative effect on the overall resolution because of increased noise reduction and in camera processing.
Cleanliness
Dust on the image sensor always needs to be addresses by the portrait photographer.
DSLR cameras are especially prone to dust problems because the sensor remains in place, where a film advances through the camera for each frame . There is a risk of debris in the camera, such as dust or sand, scratching the film; a single grain of sand can damage a whole roll of film. As film cameras age, they can develop burs in their rollers. With a digital SLR, specs are difficult to avoid, but easy to rectify using a computer with photo editing software available. Some digital SLRs have systems that remove dust from the sensor by vibrating or knocking it, sometimes in conjunction with software that remembers where dust is located and removes dust-affected pixels from pictures.
Compact digital cameras are fitted with fixed lenses; dust is excluded from the imaging area. Similar film cameras are often only light tight and not environmentally sealed. Some modern DSLRs, most notably are the high end Canon models, incorporate extensive dust and weather seals to avoid this problem.
Integrity
Film produces a first generation image, which contains only the information admitted through the aperture of the camera.
Film images are very difficult to fabricate, thus in law enforcement and in cases where the authenticity of an image is critical, like passport or visa photographs, film provides greater security over most digital cameras as digital files may have been modified using a computer. If someone modifies an authenticated image, it can be determined with special software.
SanDisk claims to have developed a write once memory stick for cameras and that the images once written cannot be altered.
Archiving
Many types of digital media are not capable of storing data for prolonged periods of time. Magnetic disks and tapes may lose their data after twenty years, flash memory cards even less. Good quality optical media may be the most durable storage media for digital data.
It is important to consider the future readability of storage media. Assuming the storage media can continue to hold data for prolonged periods of time, the short lifespan of digital technologies often causes the drives to read media to become unavailable. For example, the first 5¼-inch Floppy disks were first made available in 1976. However, the drives to read them are already extremely rare 30 years later.
The ability to decode the data is important. Digital cameras save photographs in JPEG format, that has existed for approximately 15 years. Because the instructions on how to decode this format are publicly known, it is unlikely that this files will be unreadable in the future.
Most professional cameras can save in a RAW image format, the future of which is less certain. Some of these formats contain proprietary data which is protected by patents, and could be abandoned by their makers at any time for economic reasons. This could make it difficult to read these ‘raw’ files in the future, unless the camera makers were to release information on the file formats.
However, digital archives have several methods of overcoming such obstacles. In order to counteract the file format problems, many organizations prefer to choose an open and popular file format. Doing so increases the chance that software will exist to decode the file in the future.
Additionally many organisations take an active approach to archiving rather than relying on formats being readable decades later. This takes advantage of the ability to make perfect copies of digital media. So , rather than leaving data on a format which may potentially become unreadable or unsupported, the information can typically be copied to newer media without loss of quality. This is only possible with digital media. Digital images may be printed and stored like traditional photographs.
Convenience and flexibility
Flexibility and convenience have been the main reasons for the widespread adoption of digital cameras. With film cameras, film is normally completely exposed before being processed. Only once the film is returned is it possible to see the photograph. Most digital cameras incorporate a liquid crystal display that allows the image to be viewed immediately after exposure. The photographer may delete undesired or unnecessary photographs, allowing the photographer an immediate opportunity to repeat the image. When a user desires prints, it is only necessary to print the required photographs.
With digital imaging, images may be conveniently stored on a personal computer for modification. Professional-grade digital cameras can store pictures in a raw image format which stores the output from the sensor directly rather than processing it immediately to an image. When edited in suitable software, such as Adobe Photoshop or the GNU program GIMP (which uses dcraw to read raw files), the user may manipulate certain parameters of the image, such as contrast, sharpness or colour balance, before producing a final image. Alternatively, users may retouch the content of recorded JPEG images; software for this purpose may be provided with consumer-grade cameras.
For large format and ultra large format photography, film may have some advantages, both over price and flexibility – at least outside of a studio – as large format digital cameras use scanners rather than a single sensor, these cameras are extremely expensive and not very portable.
Price
Film and digital imaging systems have different cost basis . With digital photography, cameras tend to be significantly more expensive than film equivalents. With digital cameras, taking snaps is effectively cost-free. The price of digital cameras continues to drop and using film may be seen as more expensive than digital.
Good quality film cameras are less complicated and therefore less expensive. The major expenses are ongoing film and processing costs. The photographer will only identify unsuitable images after developing and printing have been paid for.
Film offers the photographer more control over the depth-of-field than a DSLR with an APS sensor, and the cost of full-frame sensor cameras may be very high. 35 mm single-lens reflex cameras may be purchased for a fraction of the price of a full-frame DSLR. Some lenses are interchangeable between digital and film cameras; film can be an attractive introduction to photography because of this.
With many photographers switching to digital, film cameras and lenses are now available on the second-hand market at often much-reduced prices, allowing for semi-professional and even professional film cameras to be owned by people who would once never have been able to afford them.