Nothing is inherent in negatives that makes them unprovable. Please quit repeating this.
I have found Qt Creator much easier to work with than Visual Studio. It requires some more explicit management in its project files (as they are just QMake projects), but I've found that I prefer this to the endless point-and-click mazes that VS subjects me to.
It's handy enough on its own for C/C++ projects, independent of whether you are using Qt or not, but it's extremely helpful for developing applications that use Qt as it integrates very well with Qt Designer.
(Megapixels do matter if you plan to make prints beyond 8x10s.)
Bible actually teaches that God and Jesus are two totally separate entities and that it is blasphemy to call Jesus a God.
Citation on this?
I second this.
Norton Disk Doctor recovered things more times than I could count, back when I'd use already-used diskettes over and over and over again and not make backups...
I'm told they do it by examining the TTL of the packets, as in most cases packets through a tethered device will have a lower TTL than any traffic coming from the device itself.
Using Facebook (or any other online social network) and living a real life are not mutually exclusive.
I used a Newton eMate for awhile and its handwriting recognition was actually the best on anything I'd ever used. However, other things - such as the device being mind-bogglingly slow (though I suppose the Newton MessagePads were fine) and any sort of good syncing with a modern computer being at best a convoluted mess - made it less than useful for me.
Assuming for the moment that they've found a real connection...
Why does this article single out E-readers? Doesn't everything there apply just the same to LCDs, CRTs, printed material, and anything else that is capable of rendering those same easily-read fonts?
In some sense, it does. What they're talking about, I believe, is watching it propagate through gates at each clock cycle.
This might be impossible, but film has a number of things over even the best digital cameras. From color gradients (256 levels of RGB versus infinite), to the fact that it is quite difficult to doctor film without that being detected (at least easier than firing up Photoshop.)
Well, to be fair, film also has its limitations with the levels it can store. It's not exactly an even comparison, but it has a measure called film density which (if memory serves me) is a logarithm of the ratio of the amount of silver exposed in the most developed areas, to the amount of silver exposed in the least developed areas. This measure is around 2.8 for negatives and 3.2 for slides, and each step of 0.1 means an extra 1/3 of a stop of available range. As a change of 1 stop means a doubling of range, corresponding roughly to one bit of dynamic range, this gives equivalent bit depths between about 9 and 11. But like I said, it's not an even comparison... but it's not anywhere near infinite either.
Also, most digital cameras nowadays have ADCs that quantize to somewhere between 10 and 16 bits, not 8.
Shows that I know about as much about photography as the original poster...
Thanks for the enlightenment.
Development in this case is the process which produces a negative from the exposed film.
However, once you have a negative, what you describe is indeed a viable process.
One of the biggest determining factors of quality still is the physical size of the sensor. I think you'll find the images will differ in quality quite a bit if you compare side-by-side.
Well, on basically all Apple notebooks the glowing Apple logo is simply a transparent section that the already-lit backlight illuminates. Are there other glowing Apple logos I missed?