What would these pages be without pictures? The [Macro error: There is no glossary entry named "Travel"] would lack spice, and you'd never see my "kilts" in their glory!

I purchased an Apple QuickTake 100 about a year after it was released, just in time for my 1995 trip to [Macro error: There is no glossary entry named "1995 Eivissa and Gran Canaria"] . It used a serial cable to transfer photos to a host computer. Its pictures were 640 by 480 pixels.

In the late 1990s I moved up to a second-generation digital camera, the Kodak DC-120. Its pictures were 756 by 504 pixels. For the first time I was able to untether the camera from the computer. I went out and purchased the largest Kingston PCMCIA flash RAM card available, which allowed me to store around 120 images on the card. It was amazingly liberating to walk around Burning Man for an entire day and only in the evenings pull my "PowerBook" from its dusty bag to hold my daily catch of pictures.

The Nikon CoolPix 950, with a 2.1 MB CCD, gives me a 1600 by 1200 pixel (UXGA) picture. Bigger, and much clearer. The camera died, however, after only a short time.

So came the Sony DCR-TRV20 digital video recorder, which happened to have a still digital camera within. Its images, 1152 by 864 pixels, aren't nearly as good as the Nikon, but the damn thing is working. I took it to "Burning Man 2000".

In late 2003 I acquired a Casio Exilim EX-Z4U, a 4 megapixel credit-card-sized camera; pictures are 2304 by 1728 pixels. The photos printed at our local photofinisher surpass 35mm film cameras. Very shortly thereafter, due to a sandstorm, I acquire a Casio Exilim EX-Z4 (the non-US version, with the ability to take video clips as well).

In the summer of 2005 I acquire a Casio Exilim EX-Z750, a 7.2 megapixel camera only a bit larger than the EX-Z4; pictures are 3072 by 2304 pixels. The most remarkable thing about this camera is the huge 2.5-inch LCD, which takes up most of the rear.

Here are the image sizes taken by each of my cameras: