|
I've seen that once, in a very expensive Mercedes. Awesome stuff. Here's a reminder to turn on your cassette players once every couple of months, even if you're not gonna listen to them. Mechanical things like to be used once in a while or mechanisms will gum up, bearings will go sticky etc.
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2023 09:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 03:45 |
|
|
Mister Speaker posted:That's absolutely a false equivalency and you know it. A more fair comparison would be film vs. digital photography, and guess who wins that one. Depends which things you're comparing. Cost per megapixel? Film wins, easily. Speed? Lol, film's dead. Dynamic range? Pretty much identical with slow, modern color negative film, though rapidly being surpassed. Weight? Forget it. Convenience in shooting high fidelity pictures? LOL. If you need literal wall sized prints that can withstand pixel peeping, analog medium format is a rational choice. Type 120 film at 50 or 100 iso can get you resolutions of close to 100 megapixel with a 500ish euro camera. A direct comparison is hard, because film grain is not as intrusive as seeing literal pixels. If you need resolutions of literal hundreds of megapixel, you can choose for sheet film. In almost all other cases, film is obsolete. DSLRs have gotten better than film in many departments. Especially film speed. The fastest color film is 800 iso, and the resolution of that film in 24*36mm format doesn't even come close to that of a DSLR's resolution at that speed. That said, i don't shoot film for perfection. I shoot it for a specific look, without having to edit my pictures on the computer (a job i hate). I can grab a crappy east german compact camera, and end up with the whimsical look i'm going for in certain pictures. A 25 euro japanese SLR that weighs as much as a brick, if i want nicely saturated colors, with slide film, i can project on the wall to have a striking and sharp look. Or an old box camera if i want to just push a button and get a picture, and not care about quality too much because you simply cannot get much quality out of one. My phone's camera shoots higher fidelity pictures than about half my analog cameras, but typically i do like the analog pictures better because they force me into a specific process that i have a hard time doing voluntarily on my phone. LimaBiker fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Apr 29, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2023 15:14
|
|
|
Those mechanisms don't have to be too lovely, but there's a lot of variation between them. I had a very cheap stereo set component with that mechanism, and although i found it too lovely to use as a hifi component, i think it's adequate for portable use. The main thing is having a good head. The one in the stereo component sounded pretty thin and lifeless. I also have a boombox with dual mechanisms like that driven from a single motor. That's a bad idea. 1 motor, 2 mechanisms, 4 belts is a recipe for uncontrollable wow and flutter. I removed the belt to one of the mechanisms and now it's acceptable for boombox use. They'll never be great, but they can be adequate.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2023 11:07
|
|
|
Tarkus posted:When I was a kid, in order to save money on mix tapes, I would dub records and radio to to the left and right channels separately and listen to them on my stereo with the right or left channel mixer knob.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2023 12:32
|
|