Posted by davidsic
mikely 28, try to play sometimes with the exposure
Nice pics guys.
Posted by etaab
Whitby in August
Posted by riksilvers
@ etaab
You there for the Folk Festival?
I did this HDR photo from 4 pics taken with the Satio
Posted by max_wedge
Nice work!
Posted by eltoffer
look what our satios can do
LOOK HERE
Posted by mikely_28
Davidsic, I play with exposure a lot, i play with light and only thing I can get is something like that:
Nice pics?? I don't think so...
[ This Message was edited by: mikely_28 on 2010-09-01 10:48 ]
Posted by Caseiro
On 2010-09-01 01:30:55, riksilvers wrote:
@ etaab
You there for the Folk Festival?
I did this HDR photo from 4 pics taken with the Satio
How were you able to make this incredible photo????
Posted by etaab
On 2010-09-01 01:30:55, riksilvers wrote:
@ etaab
You there for the Folk Festival?
No, that picture was taken August 10th. Me and my girlfriend only went there for one day whilst we camped down the east coast. I dont even know what the Folk Festival is without Google, which i'll do right now.
Ive never made a HDR picture before.
[ This Message was edited by: etaab on 2010-09-01 17:51 ]
Posted by etaab
Some more from me and my camping holiday back in August illustrating the typical English weather.
Scarborough, 8.30am:
Scarborough, 12.45pm:
Posted by Wolkov
Posted by zide
Mikely: How do you want to take good shots if your shooting indoors and against the light? Go out and take some photos in dawn or in the end of the day. Make sure your not shooting against the light.
But yeah, the sensor/optics on Satio are quite poor. And even poorer are the camera features.
Posted by etaab
Poor, in your opinion only. zide, your negativity towards the Satio becomes boring quickly. I recently went on a camping holiday and took over 150 pictures which are excellent quality. So dont try to force your opinions about the Satio's camera onto people when they're posting proof in this very thread of its quality.
Posted by norbi_nw
quality my ass. The Satio camera SUCKS BALLS, and the software, well that sucks even more. Just look at the 0 detailed grass. A green mush. But i guess it can't be explained blind or fanatic people. Maybe some pictures look good, but so did the K810 and K750. Nothing new only a bigger picture than the K810. i tell you 0 improvement. Same poor post processing. Vivaz takes better pictures so... (I own both). Final word: mediocre.
Posted by SheiKah
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
[ This Message was edited by: SheiKah on 2010-09-05 23:44 ]
Posted by zide
Hum.
Posted by max_wedge
On 2010-09-06 00:41:55, norbi_nw wrote:
quality my ass. The Satio camera SUCKS BALLS, and the software, well that sucks even more. Just look at the 0 detailed grass. A green mush. But i guess it can't be explained blind or fanatic people. Maybe some pictures look good, but so did the K810 and K750. Nothing new only a bigger picture than the K810. i tell you 0 improvement. Same poor post processing. Vivaz takes better pictures so... (I own both). Final word: mediocre.
I guess the strengths of the Satio's camera can't be explained to blind or fanatic people who just have to hate the Satio because it doesn't happen to have the features they would like....
0 detailed grass?? From those camping pics of etaabs, the grass looks pretty good to me. It seems like you are comparing the Satio to a DSLR...
Grass is the hardest of any texture for a digital camera to get right.
yes, grass looks mushy, but you'll find that true of even expensive compact digital cameras.
Posted by HxH
Outstanding performer within good light outdoor (it will be good at night if strong light enough) shot I'm pleased with it.
Low light condition even outdoor aren't good to satisfy me even resize picture still notice noise and grain easily.
Satio have very small aperture when compare to ELM and C901
shouldn't miss this.
I brought it with me last two months sea trip, less shot that disappointed me
About camera menu and features it adequate and user friendly
I never seen any mobile change their functional less than 3 sec oops!
[ This Message was edited by: HxH on 2010-09-06 09:23 ]
Posted by norbi_nw
Guess u didnt own K810... EV change instantly.. Macro is on in 1 sec.
About the green mush, you blind people realise what did you say when nokia entered the 1.3-2 megapixel war? Against the K750.. ALL nokia pictures where like oil paintings (thats what i and all of you said), and since the K800 all SE are the same. Im not comparing it to a digital camera, but FFS add some improvement over the K810. It's the same as a C905 but bigger picture. And i have already showed sample crops of other phones vs. the C905 (grass and tree shots). I dont know where they are, but i did this long time ago, and you could clearly see how other phones (not all, 1-2) take way better pictures. But again, you cant argue with blind men. Im not saying its shit, im saying its mediocre. The pixon 12 has better detail. Samsung always has better detail. My hdd died out, i had some old shots with my w800 there, unmodified camera, and it blew the Satio away in some situations, and grass was nicely detailed. Just search for the crops i posted if you are interested.
http://www.gsmarena.com/showp[....]hootout/shots/gsmarena_004.jpg
http://www.gsmarena.com/showp[....]hootout/shots/gsmarena_010.jpg
http://www.gsmarena.com/showp[....]hootout/shots/gsmarena_037.jpg
SE are always grainy red-is washed out oil paintings...
[ This Message was edited by: norbi_nw on 2010-09-06 11:07 ]
Posted by HxH
Then buy K810 put your SUC(K)TIO on sell, all matter end
And we will enjoy posting pic for our SATIO.
Posted by Acelew
yeah,i love my Satio d most,it takes best pic for me..
Posted by norbi_nw
i WOULD sell my satio but who do you think i can fool here with it? In my country people buy Nokia and Samsung, and alot of people who want a smartphone are documented, and can see that Satio sucks. I wanted to trade it with someone for a X10 + some cash difference from me. No luck ofc.
It can take nice shots when there is alot of light and outside. Thats it. I really dont use it anymore only for calling. So make me an offer and i will sell it to you (if you like it so much be a collector, get 2).
Pity because it has the hardware potential.. It can be a monster phone... but it is = to shit if its unhacked.
Yet you are angry at me but you havent said anything about the sample crops.
I like watching how you guys post pictures, especially anouk. But in most cases it sucks monkeyballs even compared to the Elm (ask the modders).
Posted by norberto877
a couple more pictures
Posted by max_wedge
@norbi_nw, there is something wrong with those crops. The satio images look resized, there are compression artifacts from jpg compression not found on an unresized pic. Also they are slightly larger, as if the pics were taken from further away then enlarged. It may just have something to do with the different focal lengths of the pixon and satio. (30 to 35mm)
In anycase, the Pixon 12 is a great camera phone, no doubt. But you should check the GSM Arena Pixon12/Satio comparison closer - the cameras came out as a tie overall. They were full of praise for both cameras. So if Satio is as good as Pixon, or Pixon as good as Satio so what? How does this make Satio a crap cameraphone??
btw, regarding complaints of the speed of the camera ui, which personally I don't find too bad, about the same as C905, this is what gsmarena have to say:
Both of the handsets perform admirably in this test. Even though they have 50 percent more information to process than their 8MP predecessors, they still manage to be faster. We find the results of the Satio particularly impressive as smartphones usually have much slower camera interfaces than feature phones. That and the fact that it manages to do better in the most frequently used shooting-with-preview scenario are enough for us to pronounce it the winner here.
You shouldn't also forget that the Satio comes with the ultra fast BestPic burst shooting mode, which takes up to 9 shots in a rapid succession in full resolution.
You shouldn't also forget that the Satio comes with the ultra fast BestPic burst shooting mode, which takes up to 9 shots in a rapid succession in full resolution.
[ This Message was edited by: max_wedge on 2010-09-07 02:55 ]
Posted by norbi_nw
Again, im not saying its crap, its mediocre. Vivaz is better and Elm too. And non of those 2 where advertised as entertainment unlimited. Its the first and still only 12mpx camera from sony, and still they wont make it more better. It could easily blow everything away, i know that, but the crap software (the software is the huge crap here) makes it mediocre. Idiot SE developers arent interested in further tuning. They are really really dumb IMO. Should get a Nobel prize for dumbness. Never did SE improve their phones camera quality. I bet much more can be done with it, at least they should have made it full unlocked so we the customers take care of further modding. Samsung is always beating SE in details. omnia HD beat the C905 in details and the Pixon12 is beating Satio in details. Colors are ok in both phones, SE is always red-ish. Some shots where failed on GSMarena, but the phone is not a joke. Too bad it came with a crappy OS. Thats why i am mad, 1 phone has good OS (clearly im not working about the satio here) and one has good camera.. One can do this good and the other something else. I dont know why cant we get all in one phone.
So again you cant convince me that Satio is more then mediocre, because i owned ALOT of phones and i have saw the evolution of some high end phones. I am not blinded by SE nor by other manufacturers. Im just saying it can do more..
Posted by Acelew
Original
Posted by Acelew
Posted by max_wedge
On 2010-09-07 10:14:59, norbi_nw wrote:
Again, im not saying its crap, its mediocre. Vivaz is better and Elm too. And non of those 2 where advertised as entertainment unlimited. Its the first and still only 12mpx camera from sony, and still they wont make it more better. It could easily blow everything away, i know that, but the crap software (the software is the huge crap here) makes it mediocre. Idiot SE developers arent interested in further tuning. They are really really dumb IMO. Should get a Nobel prize for dumbness. Never did SE improve their phones camera quality. I bet much more can be done with it, at least they should have made it full unlocked so we the customers take care of further modding. Samsung is always beating SE in details. omnia HD beat the C905 in details and the Pixon12 is beating Satio in details. Colors are ok in both phones, SE is always red-ish. Some shots where failed on GSMarena, but the phone is not a joke. Too bad it came with a crappy OS. Thats why i am mad, 1 phone has good OS (clearly im not working about the satio here) and one has good camera.. One can do this good and the other something else. I dont know why cant we get all in one phone.
So again you cant convince me that Satio is more then mediocre, because i owned ALOT of phones and i have saw the evolution of some high end phones. I am not blinded by SE nor by other manufacturers. Im just saying it can do more..
omnia HD camera is slower than satio and slower than c905. Detail maybe about the same but no xenon flash. Slowness of satio os, yes but doesn't seem any worse than any other s60. So I think se have done what they can regarding ui responsiveness. It would have been interesting had satio been win mobile or android but it's not and we knew that from the start. As to people expecting se to upgrade satio to android or symbian 3 that's delusional. It'd be far too expensive to develop a new os firmware for an existing phone, you might as well start again from scratch on a completely new phone. What we got is what we got se never lied about it.
Btw, I've owned a few high end cameraphones myself, including the omnia i8910, c905, k800. Also a range of nokia and samsung phones so I'm going by experience as much as you are.
[ This Message was edited by: max_wedge on 2010-09-07 12:35 ]
Posted by etaab
You know what ? im not even remotely interested in reading norbi_nw's posts, in fact i just didnt read them. This thread is for posting pictures and not for slagging off the Satio. If they want to do so let them in another thread. In my previous post i wanted to include some pictures, unfortunately at the time of posting imageshack was playing up and i couldnt upload. Now im at my girlfriends house for a few days and she has no USB cable or Bluetooth for me to transfer my pictures to her laptop.
Anyway, all i have to say to such fools who think the Satio has a bad camera is this. It doesnt. norbi_nw said the Satio image quality sucks after my post. He is uneducated - how can he comment on images on my phone he has not even seen ? he is clearly of bad opinion without any proof. What a stupid comment to make.
The Satio is far from perfect and pictures posted on here probably dont look as good as a K750i from 2005, but thats because they have to be resized so much more to fit the forum. Images on my Satio look amazing on my tv at home in 1080p resolution when stored on my PS3.
Please guys, stop trying to force your bad opinions onto other people when they know better. Its like me trying to convince you are not you ! its ridiculous !
Posted by norbi_nw
OMG etaab... I also have 1 Satio, so i can comment on image quality. In fact another friend of mine has one too, so its not a faulty unit. Its the crapy software that makes it mediocre. Why do you think i have to see YOU pictures to say something? I own one too. And believe me its not because of the resized samples. Whatever, there is no use for argument here as you are satisfied with this product to the max, and dont (wouldnt like) want any improvement.. I am one of those guys who constantly fixes things, constantly wants to improve things that i have. Too bad it cant be done on the satio as it is locked in all possible ways. Cant believe the idiots released an update for the vivaz and none for the satio.
So be happy with your satio, i know i wont buy another SE phone again. Is it so hard to say "yes its not that good, it could use some improvement, but they wont give it to us, so what can we do... just be happy with what we got".??
Well the end.
Posted by gharknes1
I agree, this thread is for pics only, perhaps a mod could remove the missplaced posts to a thread better suited
Posted by riksilvers
Put them here !!
Posted by Acelew
yeah,pls end it..and etaab,u r rite..
Posted by Acelew
Original
Posted by Acelew
Posted by norbi_nw
Edit: Max i have posted the samples again on the other thread (Does anyone else hate the Satio). Samsung is 1st crop SE is 2nd.
[ This Message was edited by: norbi_nw on 2010-09-07 17:35 ]
Posted by max_wedge
@norbi_nw, I see what you mean now, but I'm pretty sure my satio is nothing like this. I would have noticed something that bad. When I get a chance I'll post some examples.
Posted by max_wedge
Infrared!
Visible light comparison:
Posted by max_wedge
the significance infrared images is that the image is composed of infrared light only, no visible light. Because different surfaces reflect infrared light differently to visible light, some things that are dark in visible light will appear bright in infrared light. Yet other things will appear aboutthe same. So infrared images, while initially look like "negative" images, are actually not negatives.
Dark things such as road surfaces appear darker (not brighter), and dark green foliage appears white.
Notice in the images above the bright white foliage - in visible light this foliage is actually dark green. Also notice the sky, which is dark compared to the bright blue of the sky in visible light.
The images are high iso, hence the graininess, because there is an Ir cut filter (blocks most Ir light) over the cmos sensor - so the camera has to increase the gain to capture the small amount of available Ir light.
With a tripod and shutterspeed control it is possible to take much better quality Ir photos.
note, these images are 'near infrared', not thermal infrared - they are not detecting heat sources; they are detecting reflected near infrared light.
[ This Message was edited by: max_wedge on 2010-09-08 13:12 ]
Posted by norbi_nw
And how did you took them?
Posted by davidsic
Posted by Acelew
Posted by max_wedge
On 2010-09-08 16:24:51, norbi_nw wrote:
And how did you took them?
digicams have sensors that can detect Ir light. But the Ir light sensitivity is washed out due to the visible light so if you block off the visible light with some material that is opaque to visible light but transparent to Ir light (an Ir-pass filter), then the camera will up the gain (iso) to itulise the small amount of Ir light that gets past the camera's Ir-cut filter (A filter placed over the sensor to block out Ir light).
I used the antenna cover off a T610 (I cried when I cut it up to fit over the satio lens!). The T610 antenna cover doubles as an antenna cover and also a window for the Ir sensor.
You can also use the unexposed (but developed) end of a strip of film negative. About two layers will do. It will block visible light but let Ir light straight through.
Posted by etaab
Personally i dont like those IR style pictures, i find them a bit pointless.
Im not very artistic !
Some more from me - i love disposable bbq's !
Posted by max_wedge
@etaab I tend to agree with you, but depending on the scenery the results can be spectacular. The one's I've posted above are just an example - some shots I took on the way to a job site.
Some of the examples here show what can be done with a camera with tripod and control over shutterspeed:
http://dimagemaker.com/2006/12/07/some-more-infrared-photography/
http://www.moonriverphotograp[....]hy/1340265_zT6FF#7282247_zZncU
But the main thing that intrigues me about Ir photography is not the aesethetic aspect, but the fact we are looking at an image that the human eye couldn't normally view. There is something "other worldly" about the images.
Posted by riksilvers
HDR is the way forward.....just need an app that lets you take the photos to do it !!!
Posted by etaab
Yeah i think HDR is better when done professionally. IR photos would be nice when taking landscapes to hang on your wall in a modern day apartment. I prefer those IR photos which are black and white rather than the purple when using the T610 antenna cover.
Posted by max_wedge
On 2010-09-10 18:51:19, etaab wrote:
Yeah i think HDR is better when done professionally. IR photos would be nice when taking landscapes to hang on your wall in a modern day apartment. I prefer those IR photos which are black and white rather than the purple when using the T610 antenna cover.
Btw, good choice of beer in those mini bbq pics
Posted by HxH
I'm not angry really believe me but annoying cuz u post it wrong place, just wanna end matter and keep it back to track so
If u said software supported is sucks big time (mine last month almost put it to sell it also unacceptable for me), I will agree with u that's all but camera ain't that suck as software os (but I still use it as capture some lecturer's board so I would not sell it cuz no replacement from
)
no more words from me about this topic! I'm finish!
Posted by Christoforo
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Posted by Acelew
nice car..