Macro Shots Of Vintage Mainframe Board - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: TheEPROM9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 13, 2018, 09:47:08 pm
content: Mainframe CardbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card PassivebySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card Intel ChipbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card ITT ChipbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card 43A16bySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card 168141bySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card CapsbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card CircuitrybySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card Tantalum CapacitorsbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card The One ICbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card More IC&#x27;sbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card CapacitorbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card Edge ConnectorbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card Tantalum CapbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card TransistorbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card 168141 SidebySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card ResistorsbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card IC&#x27;sbySimon Lyne, on FlickrMainframe Card 43A16 SidebySimon Lyne, on FlickrI don't know what system this card is from or even what most of the chips are as they come up with nothing whhen you Google the part numbers. Can't get any more macro photos at the moment as the camera I used was borrowed from a friend.

author: Nusa
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 14, 2018, 02:30:34 am
content: If you'd post some non-macro pictures of the entire card, it's far more likely someone will recognize it for whatever it is.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 14, 2018, 02:32:58 am
content: I see 1973 datecodes; perhaps the Intel and ITT databooks of that era may shed more light on what those parts are.

author: N2IXK
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 14, 2018, 02:12:26 pm
content: Those maroon/brown capacitors are silver/mica caps, not tantalum.

author: TheEPROM9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 14, 2018, 09:56:18 pm
content: Would need to take another photo and put it on Flicr as I don't have a camera crap enougth to create below 2MB pictures. I'm into photography why would I want a crap camera =-)Thanks for the corection. I should rename them acordingly.Looking on Google shead no light so if you know a way to search the part numbers please do.

author: tpowell1830
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 14, 2018, 11:10:57 pm
content: Hmm, it's hard for me to understand why these are 'vintage' when '73 was when I was learning about electronics...Maybe that means that I am vintage?FLASHBACK: Russia launches satellite, Yuri Gegarian flies to space, John Glenn orbits the earth, Apollo 1 burns up in high oxygen environment, spacecraft rendezvous in space and dock, men fly to the moon, space stations rotate the earth, a space shuttle is created to build new space station... oh now I have a headache...

author: TheEPROM9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 15, 2018, 09:03:04 pm
content: 90s stuff is vintage now =-(

author: rrinker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 20, 2018, 06:19:21 pm
content: Seriously, once they started calling Win95 'vintage' I was out. Windows 95? I was a beta tester. I already had one child and the second was on the way.But there's vintage, and there's 'vintage'. The real meaning of the word, and the eBay meaning of the word - where anything more than 2-3 years old is 'vintage'

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2018, 12:21:55 am
content: Not exactly the same thing, but for legal and other purposes, automobiles are often considered antique at only 20-25 years old.

author: rrinker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2018, 06:52:25 pm
content: Yes, in this state, Vintage is 1906-1976, classic is 15 years old, and antique is 25 years old. But to license under those designations there are also restrictions on miles driven. My truck is actually good for Antique (it's a '93) this year and I actually drive it so little it would qualify, except that you cannot haul cargo in a truck with any of those classifications, so that's out - that's all I use it for, when I need to pick up large items at the home center. Or on the rare days we actually have enough snow that I don't want to risk my car.So if we use the state automobile definition for vintage, not many computers would classify. TRS-80 Model 1 and Apple II came out in 1977.

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2018, 04:59:32 am
content: Quote from: TheEPROM9 on June 14, 2018, 09:56:18 pmBut, being into photography, you might also have access to an image processing program which can create a lower resolution version of the photo, to post here?

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2018, 05:13:33 am
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 22, 2018, 04:59:32 am+1 , also for forum viewing, most photos can be still compressed further down to < 500 KB with still good enough details and large enough for viewing at big monitor. Personally I rarely used > 500KB.Example only 167 KB ... click to enlarge.... or this with 453 KB, this is a bit larger as it has more details. I did this to share/discuss the nasty oozing flakes at plastic connectors at other thread.Unless you can afford an expensive lens that can do deep DOF at macro shots, as most of yours has really shallow ones, like the edge connectors shot, only two connectors are captured that are sharp enough to view it's details. My fav is use quality P&S camera as the DOF is pretty deep.Example this shot where details still can be captured with good enough DOF.... or this, just 512 KB and watch those lints ..My 2 cents worth.

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2018, 06:54:36 am
content: Quote from: BravoV on June 22, 2018, 05:13:33 amOuch, that must have hurt!Lenses with large f numbers, which allow one to play with limited depth of field and which show a nice bokeh for out-of-focus lights, are the pride and joy of photographers. I am sure that the OP could have stopped down his lens to get larger depth of field, and intentionally did not do to achieve this effect. Those photos are not meant for technical documentation purposes, after all.

author: GeorgeOfTheJungle
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2018, 08:15:27 am
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 22, 2018, 06:54:36 amThat's exactly what I thought too when I read it... :-)

author: TheEPROM9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2018, 07:56:12 pm
content: Quote from: ebastler on June 22, 2018, 06:54:36 amPretty much how it is, I like the shallow depth of field. The lens was borrowed so i still have to buy a proper macro. I do have a vintage macro but though test shots it is not ideal for shots with the Fuji XT-1. I have plenty of interesting vintage PCB's to grab macros of.I don't do stuff in the video editing so i don't have much in the way of fancy software as i would rather be out taking photos than yet another hobby that leads to hours spent in front of a computer screen. Trust me i spend enough time on the computer.

author: Howardlong
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2018, 08:10:44 pm
content: While the bokeh might be all arty, for technical documentation it adds no value, in fact it’s a big drawback.When I take shots for documentation, I spend a lot of time getting the light right to avoid glare, and more often than not they end up using natural diffused light together with long exposure and a tight aperture to get the depth of field necessary.On the other hand, if I take a video with a talking head, a nice wide aperture and shallow depth of field is a reasonable way to go to, but keep in mind that for technical documentary most nerds want to be able to identify what’s on the nerd shelves behind the talking head!