cylexsys.com

I’m seeing a lot of vocal supporters of the full body imaging saying that we (cattle) should be subjected to this procedure at the airport yet these people by and large, fly on private jets and are never subject to searches, metal detectors, or full body scanning machines themselves.

Should the TSA rules be changed so that EVERYONE getting on a plane at ANY airport around the country, will be subject to the same search?

If we can’t racially profile people and everyone must be treated the same, then why are the wealthy who can afford their own private jets getting preferential treatment?

This is unacceptable. Shortly after 911 I was frisked, in a very invasive way by a man in front of everyone in line. He actually squeezed my breasts and said that "it was procedure" for women that set off the metal detector.
I am not going to be fondled by the very people who let the 911 terrroists traipse through security with box cutters, shoe bombs and underwear explosives while they molest young women and harass grandmothers in wheel chairs.
This protects nobody and inconveniences everyone. Americans are paying the price for the terrorists, WE are the ones giving up our basic rights.

I have several photos that I used the zoom on and in lower light that I need to make more in focus and clearer. Does anyone know how to do this on either Microsoft Imaging or even Paint? Thanks!

Its not possible.
As a designer, it is a golden rule – if the original (meaning the photo being used in the design) is not clear or saved/scanned at a high resolution, the finished product will never look better than the original.

Programs like Photoshop allow you to sharpen images, but its not the same thing as making a pixely picture clear or in focus.

You would have to get a better pict to get a better output. working with primitive programs like MS paint, this is not ever going to happen.

I have several photos that I used the zoom on and in lower light that I need to make more in focus and clearer. Does anyone know how to do this on either Microsoft Imaging or even Paint? Thanks!

Its not possible.
As a designer, it is a golden rule – if the original (meaning the photo being used in the design) is not clear or saved/scanned at a high resolution, the finished product will never look better than the original.

Programs like Photoshop allow you to sharpen images, but its not the same thing as making a pixely picture clear or in focus.

You would have to get a better pict to get a better output. working with primitive programs like MS paint, this is not ever going to happen.

I mean like job details. Not necessarily education or salary.
technician*
maybe technologist?

A radiologist is a doctor that interprets medical images. The technologist takes the images.

More info: https://www.asrt.org/content/abouttheprofession/_AboutTheProfession.aspx

With a 4 year degree in Photography and Imaging from NYU, what are some possible career opportunities?

You could be a photographer, for one.

i want to buy a camera and imaging software because im insterested in taking up photography so please tell me your suggestions?
thanks.

It all depends on your budget and "where" do you want to start.
I mean, you don’t really have to start with a DLSR if you don’t know if you are serious about photography.
So if you are just interested, buy a like the Canon Powershot S5 IS at about 500$(check more here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_s5is.asp) or just a Canon Powershot S3 IS for 300$(http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons3is/page14.asp).

If you are very serious about starting photography start with a SLR such as Canon Rebel XT for 600$. Okay, the price sounds cheap but you’ll have to buy lenses with it and good lenses are very, very expensive and once you have a bunch of accessories you can’t give up photography so easily so buying a DSLR is about long term investment.

For the software, Adobe Photoshop without hesitation.
That software is pretty expensive except if you download it illegally…
If not, Photofiltre may be an OK program (I don’t personally have it).

One advantage that I know of is the result of a lower patient dose using digital x-ray imaging. But what are some other comparisons/advantages to digital imaging versus analong imaging in the x-ray field?

One reason is that it you can easily transfer and manipulate a digital image, whereas film is just film. Another advantage is that there is less bulk and waste because a digital sensor can be used again and again, whereas traditional x-rays require film for each one. Digital also saves time because the doctor doesn’t have to wait for film to develop.

like when you want to look at a continent the closer to a city then even closer to a house or something…. Ive tried a few and when you get to close it has no photos. Help please. Thank you!

Most of them will allow you to switch to photographs once you get close enough, but that is only some urban areas.
In google earth it is referred to as "street view" the UK, Netherlands, Spain, and France now have "street view" as well as the USA, but not Mexico.

I am currently enrolled for an Associates Degree for Fine Arts at a local community college. I’m looking around for a good college to transfer to, but there aren’t many colleges in Virginia for photography. So I was just wondering if AI had a good Photographic Imaging program and if you would you recommend it?

First make sure that the degree will lead to a good job. Best wishes.

I have a 10" 2500mm f10 Lx200 and will be using a Toucam. I have a 2x barlow but am thinking about getting one of the Televue powermates for additional magnification.

*How do I determine the focal ratio by using a barlow and/or Powermate.
*How does this change if I also use an extension tube?
*Any suggestions on which Powermate, ie 2x-5x?

Thanks!

First, telescope’s focal ratio is determined by dividing it’s focal length by it’s aperture, therefore your telescopes focal ratio is f/10:
2500mm / 254mm ~= 10

Using a Barlow or extension tube will multiply your telescope’s focal length, so the focal ratio with a 2x Barlow is f/20:
2*2500mm / 254mm ~= 20

The same goes with a Powermate, it multiplies the telescope’s focal length and a 5x Powermate gives you a focal ratio f/50. And the same formula applies to an extension tube also, it gives you more focal legth and less f-ratio.

The focal length and focal ratio determines both your magnification and how much light is projected on to your web-cam’s CCD-chip, or how bright the image is. The magnification is directly multiplied by the focal length. When using a 4x Powermate you’ll have 4x the focal length and 4x the magnification.

On the other hand the necessary exposure time grows as the square of focal ratio: the lower your focal ratio is the longer exposures you’ll have to get – in square! So, when going from f/10 to f/40 with a 4x Powermate you’ll need 4^2 = 16x the exposure time to get the same brightness.

So here’s the trade-off:
Planets are bright objects in a telescope, but when using low f -ratios you’ll have to use much longer exposure times. A longer exposure time means you will have more atmospheric distortions in *each* of your images. So a bigger magnification does not necessarily mean you’ll have better planetary images. It depends a lot on seeing and atmospheric conditions. Generally stacking smaller but crisper images will give you better results. But only generally. It really depends.

Therefore my suggestion is to try first with the 2x barlow, and based on those results to try with a bigger magnification later. A 5x Powermate is a good piece of equipment, it gives you a lot more magnification. But keep in mind that bigger magnification doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll get better planetary images. On a good night it will, on a bad night you’ll only get less images to stack.

I suggest you to visit Cloudynights, IMO it’s the best forum for these things. Here’s one good discussion on the subject: http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Board/low/Number/356896/page/3/view/collapsed/sb/6/o/o/fpart/all

Clear skies!