Talk:Pinnacle PCTV HD Card (800i): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:Sure, detail is more resolvable in the image you submitted, but it omits a portion of the card (i.e. pci riser) that the other included. Consequently, what value was added by replacing the first picture with one that better highlights known elements, yet does so at the expense of removing other important/interesting information/features conveyed by the former? --[[User:CityK|CityK]] 13:28, 31 October 2007 (CET) |
:Sure, detail is more resolvable in the image you submitted, but it omits a portion of the card (i.e. pci riser) that the other included. Consequently, what value was added by replacing the first picture with one that better highlights known elements, yet does so at the expense of removing other important/interesting information/features conveyed by the former? --[[User:CityK|CityK]] 13:28, 31 October 2007 (CET) |
||
:Ah, I did not know that the riser was important, I was just trying to add, what I felt, was a better picture (just in case the extra detail proves useful, for example if there's a bug with this revision of the cx23883 chip). I'd be more than happy to add back in the riser (I have the full image still around). In the original the logo and other details were washed out by the flash and white balance, and I was just trying to make it easier for other people to match the card. --[[User:GBob|GBob]] 17:05, 31 October 2007 (CET) |
|||
Revision as of 16:05, 31 October 2007
Why are there two pictures? What value is added? I put up the second shot as a higher quality replacement for the first picture. --GBob 23:25, 30 October 2007 (CET)
- Sure, detail is more resolvable in the image you submitted, but it omits a portion of the card (i.e. pci riser) that the other included. Consequently, what value was added by replacing the first picture with one that better highlights known elements, yet does so at the expense of removing other important/interesting information/features conveyed by the former? --CityK 13:28, 31 October 2007 (CET)
- Ah, I did not know that the riser was important, I was just trying to add, what I felt, was a better picture (just in case the extra detail proves useful, for example if there's a bug with this revision of the cx23883 chip). I'd be more than happy to add back in the riser (I have the full image still around). In the original the logo and other details were washed out by the flash and white balance, and I was just trying to make it easier for other people to match the card. --GBob 17:05, 31 October 2007 (CET)