Deb, If I'm not mistaken slides are more versatile than prints, and typically work better for astrophotography. I suspect you are better off sticking with slides for this kind of work (those that actually know for sure feel free to jump in here and either confirm or deny what I'm telling her!). Anyway, the images they give you on a disk are presumably scanned by the folks that do the processing...? Perhaps the apparent difference in image quality, aside from your old computer's graphics card, can be explained by whatever they use as a default scanning resolution. If you get your own scanner (that has the adapter to scan slides) you can set the resolution to whatever you like that will certainly yield high quality digital images from your slides. I'm curious -- how big are the digital images on the disk they gave you (in terms of file size)? What are the pixel dimensions of these images? What format are they in (TIFF, JPG, etc.)? -Rich --- UTAHDEB@aol.com wrote:
Not yet. I'm waiting for my battery so I can transfer the pictures to the laptop computer. I'm using my neighbor's slow computer and trying up her phone line. I still have to decide which ones to post. I found out that my mom's slide machine is an early 50s machine but the slides seemed to look better on that old machine than my Pentium II computer. I'm hoping the resolution is better on the laptop than my old computer.
Do you like slides or prints better? Nobody down here has a decent slide projector so I'm thinking of going back to print film for the meteors. I'm beginning to think this is a worthy pursuit. My tracking was better the second time taking piggy-back shots. I'm ready for longer focal lengths and a new digital SLR camera. I think going digital will be a lot easier.
Debbie
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail