| Author |
T610 picture size |
billychin84
Joined: Jun 29, 2003
Posts: 5
From: Malaysia
PM |
i took a picture from my t610 and i found out that the picture info tells me the picture are 18KB but when i delete the picture i found out the picture actual size is 57 kb why?? that means i only can take few picture only??? anyone meet this problem? |
|
|
Jools
Joined: May 21, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
All T610's have the same problem. It's due to the way the phone allocates and manages memory. Try seearching the forum for a more detailed description of what's happening. |
Alasken
Joined: Sep 19, 2002
Posts: 143
From: Stavanger, Norway
PM |
No, it's not. It's because the phone converts the pics to RAW format for faster image handling. It's got nothing to do with memory allocation. |
Jools
Joined: May 21, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
So you think this guy has it completely wrong? His sounds like a plausible explanation?
I'd be interested to hear the reasoning behind your explanation.
As a test I just saved an image in RAW and JPEG format. In RAW format it was 25k, in JPEG it was 6k. Yet when transferred to the phone it was 20k.
RAW image format should in theory be the same size wherever it is stored, yes? So where does the extra 5k disappear to? |
Zacay
Joined: May 18, 2003
Posts: 258
PM |
ok.. yes that guy is wrong. . and alasken is 100% right.. 
Here is the explanation.. and the answer..
When you send a picture to the phone it stores the original picture and also converts it into the raw format and stores this picture..
So the answer is,
Send a picture that is 6kb and is in raw 20 kb, you will loose 26 kb..
Now you say it took 25kb, the answer for that 1kb is,
look on the image sizes in b not in kb.
the size 6 kb or 20kb, are maybe 5,5kb and 19,5 and both are rounded up to 6 and 20 kb. |
masseur
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sydney, London
PM |
yeah, that cluster theory is most certainly wrong. In my phone I have images that consume 35kb, 36kb, 38kb, 40kb, 42kb and 45kb. If the cluster theory was correct they would all be, say, 48kb.
a couple of quick tests seems to confirm what Alaksan and Zacay are saying.
I think its about time that SE put this kind of information into their FAQ's such as the T610 FAQ as their are many inquiries in forums on this subject.
|
Alasken
Joined: Sep 19, 2002
Posts: 143
From: Stavanger, Norway
PM |
Yep, I agree Masseur. The way I found out about this was through Howardforums, where a swedish guy posted that he had met an old friend of his who worked for the software development part of SE. He asked him why the images took up so much space and he told him it was because the phone changed the image to raw format. |
Zacay
Joined: May 18, 2003
Posts: 258
PM |
The easiest way to confirm this, is to do like me.. call the SE helpdesk and ask. .and they will give you the answer
I did this when I bought the phone and sent my first picture.
too bad that the phone is so slow that it need the raw format 
[ This Message was edited by: Zacay on 2003-06-29 15:44 ] |
masseur
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sydney, London
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2003-06-29 16:43:45, Zacay wrote:
The easiest way to confirm this, is to do like me.. call the SE helpdesk and ask. .and they will give you the answer
snip...
|
|
ah now thats where I would have to disagree! Since when did the SE helpdesk know anything! 
This must be a first!
|
Jools
Joined: May 21, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
I see what you mean....
However, 25k (RAW) + 6k (JPEG) = 31k (TOTAL).
In my phone the picture took up 20k
What's happening there?! |
Nima
Joined: May 10, 2003
Posts: 15
From: Denmark
PM |
The cluster allocation theory is foolish..
If it was true, all files would be larger than normal, and not only image files. So the RAW theory sounds more reasonable, allthoug it's a bitter end to all our hopes about it being fixed in the future |
MaThIbUs
Joined: May 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Belgium
PM, WWW
|
What about the '13 second trick'? Doesn't that work with the T610?
This message was posted from a T300 |
masseur
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sydney, London
PM |
No, the 13 second trick has nothing to do with what is being discussed here.
|
Zacay
Joined: May 18, 2003
Posts: 258
PM |
Jools3g..
Well, we dont knwo what format they use exactly,
the only thing we know is that it is saving the image in another format that runs much faster in the phone, and that is saves both formats..
And the most reasonable format would be raw format
Thats why the pictures takes more space.. !!
[ This Message was edited by: Zacay on 2003-06-29 18:02 ] |
MaThIbUs
Joined: May 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Belgium
PM, WWW
|
Thread summary: RAW sucks, JPEG rules!
This message was posted from a T300 |
|
|
Posted: 2003-06-29 10:00
