1996 was also the launch of APS-C which had the same ratio. Curious if Kodak just reused existing hardware for the camera so matched that with the sensor?
I think that's a different question; i.e. the ratios of 756x504 and 720x480 are both 1.5:1 (or, as we say in the camera world)
IMO the most likely factor for camera makers (and/or sensor suppliers[0]) is 'how much resolution can one pack into a sensor for marketing purposes while keeping yield margin in check for profit'. Megapixels instead of Megahertz...
[0] - Maybe different back then but the current state is that even the 'big names' will get their sensors from 'competing' camera makers...
The DC50’s resolution is a weird-ass 756×504 pixels
Most image sensors have a few extra rows and columns beyond their nominal resolution; this looks like such an extension of the common 720x480.
I still have my DC280. 1760x1168. Here's a sample (from the Jaques Littlefield tank collection).
https://www.w6rz.net/DCP_1004.JPG
My first digital camera was the DC-215 which was 1152x864
1996 was also the launch of APS-C which had the same ratio. Curious if Kodak just reused existing hardware for the camera so matched that with the sensor?
I think that's a different question; i.e. the ratios of 756x504 and 720x480 are both 1.5:1 (or, as we say in the camera world)
IMO the most likely factor for camera makers (and/or sensor suppliers[0]) is 'how much resolution can one pack into a sensor for marketing purposes while keeping yield margin in check for profit'. Megapixels instead of Megahertz...
[0] - Maybe different back then but the current state is that even the 'big names' will get their sensors from 'competing' camera makers...
I was going to say. It is also very close to CRT TV resolutions (or whatever you would call it).
This is the sort of thing that lifts my spirits. Bravo, author!
Agree! LLMs are interesting and useful, but this is creative!
I live for posts like this. Bravo!
[dead]