The dSLR actually debuted in 1986, in the form of a prototype analog electronic still SLR camera from Nikon. Kodak took the concept a step further, and in 1991, released the first commercially viable dSRL built from a modified Nikon body, rebuilt drive unit, and a storage unit that was connected by a cable to the rest of the body. It had 1.3 megapixels and cost …$30,000.
Since then, the race has been on for companies and design teams to both streamline and bulk up these ‘next generation cameras’. For people that are less familiar with photography, this concept of a $30,000 camera seems a little ridiculous. Time to look at the guts of these things and show the difference between a digital point-and-shoot camera (digicam) and a full-sized digital Single Lens Reflex camera (dSLR).
For a digicam, the viewfinder is just this extra lens on top of the camera. It’s good for framing or composing an image, but it can be as much as an inch away from the lens – and the lens is what will be taking the picture. The best way to make absolutely sure that you are seeing what picture will be taken, is to use the LCD screen on the back of the digicam. This screen takes its reading directly from the lens itself, so there is no offset. When you snap the picture, you can be looking at either the screen, or through the viewfinder, and the camera will take the shot, exposing the ‘film’ (actually a sensor, in the case of digital cameras), and storing the image all without interrupting your sight.
For a SLR, well. It’s a long process for the light to get to that sensor.
The light passes through the lens assembly, is reflected into the pentaprism by the reflex mirror (which must be at an exact 45 degree angle), and is projected on the matte focusing screen. A condensing lens, and internal reflections in the roof pentaprism, projects the image through the eyepiece to the photographer's eye. When an image is photographed, the mirror swings upwards (suddenly making the viewfinder useless for a split second), the focal-plane shutter opens, and the image is projected and captured on the sensor, after which actions, the shutter closes, the mirror returns to a critical 45 degree angle (making the viewfinder functional again), and the diaphragm reopens and the built-in drive mechanism retensions the shutter for the next exposure.
Whew.
Did you catch the key differences? Through a series of mirrors and lenses, you are looking into the viewfinder, but out the lens. When you press the button, mirrors and lenses realign for a split second to allow the sensor to see what you were looking at, and then switch back again.
This key difference is how photographers make certain they have the right view of their subjects’ eyes. A tiny variation, where the person may be looking too high, or past the photographer, may not seem a big deal – but the human eye would recognize it in the resulting image, and can make for some amusing looking people with crossed eyes. The SLR format also allows for extremely close-up imagery, called macro photography, that would be much more difficult with a camera that required you to use a viewfinder a full inch away from the lens. You’re going to miss that ladybug by a mile if you think you’re looking right at it, but the lens is pointing beside it at the leaf.
A bit of a joke, there.
The camera shoots, leaves, and you missed it.
…Okay, that was a stretch. Promise I’ll work on it.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
File Size - Resolution - Image Quality
Like the other tips, this may be one that earns a “Duh” from those that know the concept, but it’s actually rather confusing for people who are new to the scene.
File size. Image quality. Resolution.
Different cameras focus (haha) different aspects of this idea, but it comes down to the same thing. How many pictures can you fit on the memory space allotted? You may be using the grandest memory card in the world, or the internal memory that came with the camera. Either way, it’s a finite amount of space, and the quality of each image you capture will determine how many more like it you can fit into that space.
The higher the resolution, the larger the file size will be. 800x600 right on up to some crazy numbers. I can’t keep up with what point-and-shoots are capable of, and some seem to be overreaching their grasp. Ever hear that phrase? It’s the idea that your fingers can reach the object, but you can’t reach far enough to actually grab it. That’s what happens when a point-and-shoot camera starts throwing out big number megapixels and high resolutions at you. You will then start to see a divergence of file size, image size, and actual image quality. Your best bet is to always take a few shots, and then see how they look in whatever medium you’re going to be using them. Email, webpages, printing – all three will require different levels of file size, image quality, and resolution.
To get the most pictures onto your camera at one time, you want to set the resolution, file size, or image quality way down. On a typical memory card, purchased for dirt cheap at walmart, this will probably net you 300 images or more. That is a lot of point-and-shooting. 24 exposures for a roll of film, or a disposable camera, versus 300+ images on your digital? Suddenly you should be more concerned about your battery life than whether you have room for more pictures. But the end result is that these images are going to find a limited range of uses. Printing them will be limited to wallet sized, or perhaps larger if you’re going to be alright with pixilation, fuzziness, and maybe some digital ‘artifacts’ on the image (those are the big blocky squares that look like varying degrees of focus). On the other hand, webpages and email work much better with small file sizes – whatever the size the image appears on the screen, if it is only 24kilobytes, then a 24.4bp modem will download it in one second. Most people these days seem to be on a broadband internet of one sort or another, so it’s easy for people to go nuts with file size. But why kill the load-time on a webpage or clog up someone’s email when 24-50kb is plenty for them to see the image on their little monitor? They’re not going to be framing it. They’re not going to be viewing it from across the room. Despite what our parents told us about sitting too close to the television, most of us now spend over 8 hours a day sitting within 2 feet of these screens. 2-3 inches tall is more than enough for those images.
Bumping up the resolution or image quality will also cause the file size to soar. Only do this if you intend on editing the image or printing it for display. And by ‘display’, please recognize that an 8x10 portrait may be your best of best option from a point-and-shoot camera. There’s a reason that 30x40 over-the-sofa family portraits are taken by a professional photographer’s camera. He paid the money to make sure that camera has a clear shot of that sparkle in gramma’s eye, even when gramma’s eye is printed larger than life. Of course, he’s going to make sure you pay for that, too.
That’s why you’re putting the sparkle in gramma’s eye with a wallet-sized picture of her grandkids from your point-and-shoot, isn’t it?
File size. Image quality. Resolution.
Different cameras focus (haha) different aspects of this idea, but it comes down to the same thing. How many pictures can you fit on the memory space allotted? You may be using the grandest memory card in the world, or the internal memory that came with the camera. Either way, it’s a finite amount of space, and the quality of each image you capture will determine how many more like it you can fit into that space.
The higher the resolution, the larger the file size will be. 800x600 right on up to some crazy numbers. I can’t keep up with what point-and-shoots are capable of, and some seem to be overreaching their grasp. Ever hear that phrase? It’s the idea that your fingers can reach the object, but you can’t reach far enough to actually grab it. That’s what happens when a point-and-shoot camera starts throwing out big number megapixels and high resolutions at you. You will then start to see a divergence of file size, image size, and actual image quality. Your best bet is to always take a few shots, and then see how they look in whatever medium you’re going to be using them. Email, webpages, printing – all three will require different levels of file size, image quality, and resolution.
To get the most pictures onto your camera at one time, you want to set the resolution, file size, or image quality way down. On a typical memory card, purchased for dirt cheap at walmart, this will probably net you 300 images or more. That is a lot of point-and-shooting. 24 exposures for a roll of film, or a disposable camera, versus 300+ images on your digital? Suddenly you should be more concerned about your battery life than whether you have room for more pictures. But the end result is that these images are going to find a limited range of uses. Printing them will be limited to wallet sized, or perhaps larger if you’re going to be alright with pixilation, fuzziness, and maybe some digital ‘artifacts’ on the image (those are the big blocky squares that look like varying degrees of focus). On the other hand, webpages and email work much better with small file sizes – whatever the size the image appears on the screen, if it is only 24kilobytes, then a 24.4bp modem will download it in one second. Most people these days seem to be on a broadband internet of one sort or another, so it’s easy for people to go nuts with file size. But why kill the load-time on a webpage or clog up someone’s email when 24-50kb is plenty for them to see the image on their little monitor? They’re not going to be framing it. They’re not going to be viewing it from across the room. Despite what our parents told us about sitting too close to the television, most of us now spend over 8 hours a day sitting within 2 feet of these screens. 2-3 inches tall is more than enough for those images.
Bumping up the resolution or image quality will also cause the file size to soar. Only do this if you intend on editing the image or printing it for display. And by ‘display’, please recognize that an 8x10 portrait may be your best of best option from a point-and-shoot camera. There’s a reason that 30x40 over-the-sofa family portraits are taken by a professional photographer’s camera. He paid the money to make sure that camera has a clear shot of that sparkle in gramma’s eye, even when gramma’s eye is printed larger than life. Of course, he’s going to make sure you pay for that, too.
That’s why you’re putting the sparkle in gramma’s eye with a wallet-sized picture of her grandkids from your point-and-shoot, isn’t it?
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Steadying your Point-and-Shoot
The D60 came in and it is looking quite pretty. Functionality is good, and the results have been … satisfactory. More on that when I run out of other things.
Last time, I talked about how to trick a point-and-shoot camera into focusing on the right element in view. This time I’m going to give you a few pointers on how to get the best clarity from that shot.
When a picture is not well focused, there are a few reasons why this might be the case. It could be that the camera itself was focused on the wrong thing; ie: that leaf in the foreground as opposed to your real subject further on. It could also be that the subject was in motion, smearing the image across a clear background. It may even be that the image was too dark, and the camera kept the shutter open too long in an attempt to get enough light. Finally, YOU might have moved.
We’ve already covered a few ways you can trick a camera out of doing the first hiccup. The second is not something that is easily controlled. If we are talking about a car going by, then the solution is to somehow move your camera with the vehicle so that it is the background that blurs but the car stays crisp. But if you’re taking pictures of a group of children and they are not, as children never seem to, holding completely still, then you will get smear-blur. There’s no single element for you to move your camera with in order to clarify it, and you’d never be able to keep up with the randomness anyway.
The second, third, and fourth hiccup are actually the same problem. The shutter is open for a set length of time, letting the sensor ‘see’ the image, and then the shutter closes again when enough light has passed through. Sometimes there is plenty of light, but the shutter is simply too slow to completely avoid smear-blur. From the time it opens to the time it closes, your subject has moved, even when the shutter is moving as fast as it can. In dark settings, the automatic camera will keep the shutter open longer in order to keep you from having a flat, black image, maybe with a spot of light from a street lamp or something. You are more likely to get a blur during dark times than any other, because the camera is attempting to adjust for this no matter what is moving. When the camera itself moves during the time where the shutter is open, EVERYTHING will smear. Unless you are moving the camera WITH your subject, I mean. But that technique is difficult and it takes a lot of practice to freeze a moving element by moving your camera exactly as it does.
There is not much you can do about your point-and-shoot camera’s shutter speed. You could slow it down, for artsy trick shots (or things in the dark that you know will suddenly get bright, like fireworks). The best you can do is select the automated settings designed for specific situations, like the fireworks setting, sports (for the fastest shutter speed), and various portrait or landscape options.
Since you can’t do very much with the shutter, and you can’t control the movement of your subject, the last thing you can do is reduce the amount of moving that your camera does.
The obvious solution is a tripod. Tripods can be expensive and, really, a point-and-shoot camera looks silly on a 4+ foot set of legs. Many of them have the attachment placement, or a bracket to put the tripod’s grips, but it still looks ridiculous. Smaller tripods are available, around the six inch height, but these are almost always designed specifically for the self-portrait types of shots. If you had a brace that was convenient to set the camera on, you wouldn’t need a tripod.
Which brings us to the next solution: a brace. A park bench, a tree, a wall, a lamp post. Anything that will not move can become a steadying support. Place the side or bottom of the camera directly against the object and then frame your picture. Don’t make the mistake of setting a corner of the camera against the object, or taking up an awkward and uncomfortable pose when using it, or you’ll be back to the same problem. You’ll be wobbling and tottering, even just a little, while thinking you were braced. What you want to do is reduce the amount that your muscles are supporting the camera – muscles are designed as a compensation mechanism. If you were to stand up straight, completely still, you could feel your muscles at the front and back of your ankles working to keep you steady, alternating pulls to compensate for slight motion and winds gravity and whatever else is trying to get you into a prone position. Your bones do not have this problem, so if there is nothing else available for a brace, use your own skeleton. That is to say, if worst comes to worst, sit on your butt and set the camera on your bent knee. Your foot and your butt are working as two legs of a tripod, and your musculature isn’t involved in any way (except to keep your skeleton together, I guess). Instant tripod – sort of. Bi-pod? There IS such a thing as a monopod…
Let’s create a monopod for those people uninterested in sitting on cold, wet grass. Or gravel. Or in the middle of a forest, or at a sporting event. There are plenty of reasons you may not want to put your skeleton to use. Rather than go out and purchase a 4 foot monopod, we’ll instead make use of that screw-hole for another item. A screw. Attach a long thread, maybe of yarn or some other string that will not stretch, to the neck of a screw that will fit into that aperture. Make sure the string is long enough to tie, and then have enough length left over to have about half a foot on the ground. Then screw it into the tripod receptacle and let the string hang from your camera to the ground. Now step on the dangling end of the string. Remember how we mentioned your musculature was a compensation mechanism? Well we are going to force it to compensate for a force that will not move, hopefully keeping your muscles as still as possible. Pull upwards on the camera until there is no slack in the string (keep your foot solid), and now compose your picture with a steady camera, held aloft by your arms which are fighting a consistent pressure of a string pulling down. Instant poor-man’s portable monopod!
As always, do your best to make sure there is plenty of light so the camera is not having to compensate with a slower shutter speed. Don’t rely entirely on the flash, as even at it’s best, flash imagery can look garish. There is no better way to add 5 pounds to a person, while still making them look like a cadaver, than to have a straight-on flash be your only light source.
But at least that picture won’t have any motion blur.
Last time, I talked about how to trick a point-and-shoot camera into focusing on the right element in view. This time I’m going to give you a few pointers on how to get the best clarity from that shot.
When a picture is not well focused, there are a few reasons why this might be the case. It could be that the camera itself was focused on the wrong thing; ie: that leaf in the foreground as opposed to your real subject further on. It could also be that the subject was in motion, smearing the image across a clear background. It may even be that the image was too dark, and the camera kept the shutter open too long in an attempt to get enough light. Finally, YOU might have moved.
We’ve already covered a few ways you can trick a camera out of doing the first hiccup. The second is not something that is easily controlled. If we are talking about a car going by, then the solution is to somehow move your camera with the vehicle so that it is the background that blurs but the car stays crisp. But if you’re taking pictures of a group of children and they are not, as children never seem to, holding completely still, then you will get smear-blur. There’s no single element for you to move your camera with in order to clarify it, and you’d never be able to keep up with the randomness anyway.
The second, third, and fourth hiccup are actually the same problem. The shutter is open for a set length of time, letting the sensor ‘see’ the image, and then the shutter closes again when enough light has passed through. Sometimes there is plenty of light, but the shutter is simply too slow to completely avoid smear-blur. From the time it opens to the time it closes, your subject has moved, even when the shutter is moving as fast as it can. In dark settings, the automatic camera will keep the shutter open longer in order to keep you from having a flat, black image, maybe with a spot of light from a street lamp or something. You are more likely to get a blur during dark times than any other, because the camera is attempting to adjust for this no matter what is moving. When the camera itself moves during the time where the shutter is open, EVERYTHING will smear. Unless you are moving the camera WITH your subject, I mean. But that technique is difficult and it takes a lot of practice to freeze a moving element by moving your camera exactly as it does.
There is not much you can do about your point-and-shoot camera’s shutter speed. You could slow it down, for artsy trick shots (or things in the dark that you know will suddenly get bright, like fireworks). The best you can do is select the automated settings designed for specific situations, like the fireworks setting, sports (for the fastest shutter speed), and various portrait or landscape options.
Since you can’t do very much with the shutter, and you can’t control the movement of your subject, the last thing you can do is reduce the amount of moving that your camera does.
The obvious solution is a tripod. Tripods can be expensive and, really, a point-and-shoot camera looks silly on a 4+ foot set of legs. Many of them have the attachment placement, or a bracket to put the tripod’s grips, but it still looks ridiculous. Smaller tripods are available, around the six inch height, but these are almost always designed specifically for the self-portrait types of shots. If you had a brace that was convenient to set the camera on, you wouldn’t need a tripod.
Which brings us to the next solution: a brace. A park bench, a tree, a wall, a lamp post. Anything that will not move can become a steadying support. Place the side or bottom of the camera directly against the object and then frame your picture. Don’t make the mistake of setting a corner of the camera against the object, or taking up an awkward and uncomfortable pose when using it, or you’ll be back to the same problem. You’ll be wobbling and tottering, even just a little, while thinking you were braced. What you want to do is reduce the amount that your muscles are supporting the camera – muscles are designed as a compensation mechanism. If you were to stand up straight, completely still, you could feel your muscles at the front and back of your ankles working to keep you steady, alternating pulls to compensate for slight motion and winds gravity and whatever else is trying to get you into a prone position. Your bones do not have this problem, so if there is nothing else available for a brace, use your own skeleton. That is to say, if worst comes to worst, sit on your butt and set the camera on your bent knee. Your foot and your butt are working as two legs of a tripod, and your musculature isn’t involved in any way (except to keep your skeleton together, I guess). Instant tripod – sort of. Bi-pod? There IS such a thing as a monopod…
Let’s create a monopod for those people uninterested in sitting on cold, wet grass. Or gravel. Or in the middle of a forest, or at a sporting event. There are plenty of reasons you may not want to put your skeleton to use. Rather than go out and purchase a 4 foot monopod, we’ll instead make use of that screw-hole for another item. A screw. Attach a long thread, maybe of yarn or some other string that will not stretch, to the neck of a screw that will fit into that aperture. Make sure the string is long enough to tie, and then have enough length left over to have about half a foot on the ground. Then screw it into the tripod receptacle and let the string hang from your camera to the ground. Now step on the dangling end of the string. Remember how we mentioned your musculature was a compensation mechanism? Well we are going to force it to compensate for a force that will not move, hopefully keeping your muscles as still as possible. Pull upwards on the camera until there is no slack in the string (keep your foot solid), and now compose your picture with a steady camera, held aloft by your arms which are fighting a consistent pressure of a string pulling down. Instant poor-man’s portable monopod!
As always, do your best to make sure there is plenty of light so the camera is not having to compensate with a slower shutter speed. Don’t rely entirely on the flash, as even at it’s best, flash imagery can look garish. There is no better way to add 5 pounds to a person, while still making them look like a cadaver, than to have a straight-on flash be your only light source.
But at least that picture won’t have any motion blur.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Photography Tricks
There is a wall, when it comes to photography. It’s when your equipment can not perform what you’re trying to ask of it.
Some will say, even with a non-pro soccer ball, Beckham would beat out the average player on the field. However, even Beckham may admit he’s not having much fun on the field if the ball is flat. A child could make do, maybe have some fun, but no one can really accomplish much with it.
So my first step into dSLR is the Nikon D60 and a couple of lenses that came in a kit – hopefully that will get me over the wall, and I can start to expand my knowledge of the craft.
In the meantime, remember that other soccer ball? Can’t do much with it, but it can be a little fun. You have to learn some tricks, too, to get it to do what you want. You have to get creative.
Point-and-shoot cameras have evolved to take a lot of the effort out of photography. They have been given auto focus, light sensors, internal image compression, automatic flash, and more. These tools make it easy for anyone to pick up a camera, point it at the subject, and capture the moment with ease. The picture comes out clear enough and bright enough to email back home to mom.
But sometimes the autofocus will latch onto something you aren’t interested in. Sometimes the light sensor gets confused by shadows. Sometimes the flash is a bit too much. And sometimes that image compression winds up just crushing your image. That’s when you have to start learning some tricks.
Until the new camera comes in, I’ll share some of the tricks I’ve learned from using a 4.1mp Kodak Easyshare digital camera.
First of all, defeating the autofocus.
I’ve enjoyed taking shots of various forested areas nearby. It allows me to discover and share the treasures that are hidden out amongst the trees. In an old town that saw a boom and bust over 50 years ago, there are a lot of treasures tucked down in the shadows. Point-and-shoot cameras, though, were designed for a clear shot of the family or house, and will automatically try to focus on the most obvious element in view. Often, this means your camera is struggling to focus on the tree branch or twig that is dangling down in front of you. You may not even see it, because your attention is on the decrepit house in the woods. But when you get home, load all your images, and inspect your hard day’s work, you’re definitely going to see that twig. In high relief. Maybe there’s a blur in the background that was a house – maybe not even that.
To combat this autofocus feature, you have to know what it’s doing and play along. Depressing the shutter release button half way causes the camera to focus and take a light reading. If you’re lucky enough to be on a shaded road, you can turn to the side and point your camera down the lane to approximately the distance between yourself and the subject you’re actually going to shoot. Let’s say the house is 20 yards into the woods. Let the camera focus on the road about 20 yards away. Keeping the shutter release halfway down, turn back to the house and snap the picture. Voila, the camera should ignore the limb, twig, leaf, or anything else that may be in the way. After all, it’s already focused in and set to take the picture.
Pro-tip. Remember that, while autofocusing, it is also taking a light reading. If your road is well-lit, and the house in the woods is shaded, your camera will be trying to adjust for the bright road and you will lose the house in darkness. You may try shielding the light sensor on your camera with your hand to reduce the amount of light hitting it, but suddenly you’re changing this trick from “Not an exact science” to “A shot in the dark.”
And those pictures rarely come out right.
Some will say, even with a non-pro soccer ball, Beckham would beat out the average player on the field. However, even Beckham may admit he’s not having much fun on the field if the ball is flat. A child could make do, maybe have some fun, but no one can really accomplish much with it.
So my first step into dSLR is the Nikon D60 and a couple of lenses that came in a kit – hopefully that will get me over the wall, and I can start to expand my knowledge of the craft.
In the meantime, remember that other soccer ball? Can’t do much with it, but it can be a little fun. You have to learn some tricks, too, to get it to do what you want. You have to get creative.
Point-and-shoot cameras have evolved to take a lot of the effort out of photography. They have been given auto focus, light sensors, internal image compression, automatic flash, and more. These tools make it easy for anyone to pick up a camera, point it at the subject, and capture the moment with ease. The picture comes out clear enough and bright enough to email back home to mom.
But sometimes the autofocus will latch onto something you aren’t interested in. Sometimes the light sensor gets confused by shadows. Sometimes the flash is a bit too much. And sometimes that image compression winds up just crushing your image. That’s when you have to start learning some tricks.
Until the new camera comes in, I’ll share some of the tricks I’ve learned from using a 4.1mp Kodak Easyshare digital camera.
First of all, defeating the autofocus.
I’ve enjoyed taking shots of various forested areas nearby. It allows me to discover and share the treasures that are hidden out amongst the trees. In an old town that saw a boom and bust over 50 years ago, there are a lot of treasures tucked down in the shadows. Point-and-shoot cameras, though, were designed for a clear shot of the family or house, and will automatically try to focus on the most obvious element in view. Often, this means your camera is struggling to focus on the tree branch or twig that is dangling down in front of you. You may not even see it, because your attention is on the decrepit house in the woods. But when you get home, load all your images, and inspect your hard day’s work, you’re definitely going to see that twig. In high relief. Maybe there’s a blur in the background that was a house – maybe not even that.
To combat this autofocus feature, you have to know what it’s doing and play along. Depressing the shutter release button half way causes the camera to focus and take a light reading. If you’re lucky enough to be on a shaded road, you can turn to the side and point your camera down the lane to approximately the distance between yourself and the subject you’re actually going to shoot. Let’s say the house is 20 yards into the woods. Let the camera focus on the road about 20 yards away. Keeping the shutter release halfway down, turn back to the house and snap the picture. Voila, the camera should ignore the limb, twig, leaf, or anything else that may be in the way. After all, it’s already focused in and set to take the picture.
Pro-tip. Remember that, while autofocusing, it is also taking a light reading. If your road is well-lit, and the house in the woods is shaded, your camera will be trying to adjust for the bright road and you will lose the house in darkness. You may try shielding the light sensor on your camera with your hand to reduce the amount of light hitting it, but suddenly you’re changing this trick from “Not an exact science” to “A shot in the dark.”
And those pictures rarely come out right.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Definitions
Main Entry: pal·ette
Pronunciation: \ˈpa-lət\
Function: noun
Etymology: French, from Middle French, diminutive of pale spade, from Latin pala; probably akin to Latin pangere to fix — more at pact
Date: 1622
1: a thin oval or rectangular board or tablet that a painter holds and mixes pigments on
2 a: the set of colors put on the palette b (1): a particular range, quality, or use of color (2): a comparable range, quality, or use of available elements (a rich palette of tones and timbres) (a palette of flavors)
Main Entry: pix·el
Pronunciation: \ˈpik-səl, -ˌsel\
Function: noun
Etymology: pix + element
Date: 1969
1 : any of the small discrete elements that together constitute an image (as on a television or computer screen)
Pronunciation: \ˈpa-lət\
Function: noun
Etymology: French, from Middle French, diminutive of pale spade, from Latin pala; probably akin to Latin pangere to fix — more at pact
Date: 1622
1: a thin oval or rectangular board or tablet that a painter holds and mixes pigments on
2 a: the set of colors put on the palette b (1): a particular range, quality, or use of color (2): a comparable range, quality, or use of available elements (a rich palette of tones and timbres) (a palette of flavors)
Main Entry: pix·el
Pronunciation: \ˈpik-səl, -ˌsel\
Function: noun
Etymology: pix + element
Date: 1969
1 : any of the small discrete elements that together constitute an image (as on a television or computer screen)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)