Bluetooth is too slow for multi-megabyte pix.
In bits/second, Bluetooth is about 1 Mbps, 802.11b is 11 Mbps, 802.11a or -
g run at 54 Mbps.
So with 802.11a or -g, you could theoretically transfer a 5.1 MP pic in
5,100,000 * 3 * 16 / 54,000,000 = 4.25 seconds (assuming 16 bits/colour)
or less, depending on compression. Since most chips alternate green with
red and blue pixels, and the dynamic range is less than 16 bits, the raw
picture might take up
5,100,000 * 12 = 61.2 Mbits
which would take just over a second.
But if some lossless compression were used, might be three or more times
faster at 54 Mbps.
That's faster than writing to all but the newest flash cards.
tOM
On Friday, March 14, 2003 at 17:05
Mike Darling <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Isn't that one of the selling points for the 'bluetooth' technology we've
> been hearing about?
>
> On 3/14/03 3:12 PM, "tOM Trottier" <Tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > A wireless network, with live transfer of pictures when taken, would not
> > only eliminate the cable, but could eliminate the need for mega-storage in
> > the camera, and free the photographer to move around without carrying a
> > laptop or hard drive. There could even be an alarm if the laptop or camera
> > move out of a specified range.
>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>
---- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur ----
,__@ tOM Trottier +1 613 860-6633 fax:231-6115
_-\_<, 758 Albert St.,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8
(*)/'(*) ICQ:57647974 N45.412 W75.714
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety." -- Benjamin Franklin
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|