| Author |
Video Recording and photo quality is poor in new Firmware |
augustborn9917
Joined: Jun 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Uranus
PM |
@numb and etaab: improper study. you cannot compare photos with different lighting conditions. look at the shadows: dawn/dusk vs. midday. "full on" lighting will wash out the colors.
*need 2 cameras, 2 diferent FW, same spot, same focus point, seltimer on. either way, difference should be barely perceptible (both excellent). video quality however..........
|
|
|
numb
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: > 500
PM |
true true augustborn |
etaab
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK - South Yorkshire
PM |
@ augustborn9917 - thank you for pointing that out to us, even though its obvious and we already knew it. We're not stupid you know.
@ numb
- first one looks alot more natural in colors
I'd disagree. The first picture looks more colourful simply because of the time of day. The second picture looks less colourful simply because the sun was much brighter.
- the road doesnt look naturall, to bright, so does the bricks up to the grass
It looks perfectly natural to me. That is how the road looked when i took the picture. That particular road is very light in colour, not black.
- And look at the white windows in the back, they are starting to burn out
I think you have your PC screens gamma turned too high, it looks white on my screen and not burned out at all.
- look at the roof of the house in the middle, its almost getting white
Funnily enough, that particular roof is rather grey when you see it in person. It is covered in a fungi or moss, or something else which grows on the slates which makes the roof look light. The fact the sun was directly facing that roof also illuminates it far more.
- Details in the grass are getting lost because of overexposure, much better grass in the first picture. I also find more compression noise in the second picture.
Thats a matter of opinion. Personally, i can see why the grass looks poorer - brighter sun, less shadows, and in the first picture the grass had recently been mown, and there were large lumps of grass built up. In the second picture, they've gone, so the grass looks less textured.
- First picture is definately better and more natural
Id have to agree, the first picture definitely looks better. However, i know from being there in person that the differences are nothing to do with the firmware of the phone, but the conditions i took them in.
Notice that from the tree's shadow that in the first picture the sun is off to the forward right. In the second, the sun is directly to my right rear. So, everything in front of me is being illuminated much much more. The first picture was taken at something like 7.30am, where the sun had barely risen.
A point worth noting is however, notice in the first picture that the sky is overexposed. In the second picture, the sky looks more natural and less exposed. Better IMO.
Check me out on Instagram ! search for etaab ! |
numb
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: > 500
PM |
#Etaab
ok - Ill accept your notes, you are the better judge of this picture since you know how it looks in real life 
|
etaab
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK - South Yorkshire
PM |
Well, i'll try to get a better comparison within the next few days if im near that area i took the picture. Maybe even tomorrow as i drive to work, early in the morning. If the sun is pretty much the same as it was when i took the original we'll get a better comparison.
The comparison isnt the best simply because of the different conditions they were taken in. It would be even more fruitful if i had a second K750i running R1A, but i dont. 
Anyway numb, i still agree with you. I prefer the first picture taken with R1A firmware. Not because of the firmware discussion, but simply because it looks more dramatic with the morning light and long swooping shadows, even if the sky is overexposed. Pictures taken in the midday sun like the second tend to be more boring and bland. 
Check me out on Instagram ! search for etaab ! |
pandthu
Joined: Sep 12, 2004
Posts: 38
PM |
Got a reply frm SE .they said it was by mistake they left out the 'fine' option:-o .so the upgraded k750i (RJ)the 'fine' option will not work ,even if u use 'fine' it will take pictures and videos in 'normal' mode .so the pictures taken are of low quality,no jpge compression or algorithm.
This message was posted from a K750 |
etaab
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK - South Yorkshire
PM |
..and did they mention the video quality.. ?
Check me out on Instagram ! search for etaab ! |
Arne Anka
Joined: Nov 05, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden
PM |
He said tney have left out the "fine" option for video recording as well and hence the lower quality. Or did you mean something else ? |
etaab
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK - South Yorkshire
PM |
But the video didnt have a fine option. It just recorded in standard about 200kbps, now it only records at something like 80kbps with new firmware.
As much as id like to believe these comments by people like pandthu, i prefer to wait until SE actually fix the phone before assuming they automatically will just because someone on an internet forum says SE told them they would.
I still stick to my original statement, i do not notice any quality difference in still pictures - but the video is poor.
Check me out on Instagram ! search for etaab ! |
etaab
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK - South Yorkshire
PM |
OK, heres yet another picture taken in the same place. One hour earlier in the day though than the first taken with R1J, so its a little darker than the others.
Picture taken 29/5/05, R1A firmware, 553kb:
Picture taken 1/7/05, R1J firmware, 405kb:
Picture taken 5/7/05, R1J firmware, 323kb:
A little darker, because of the slightly earlier time in the day over the previous two pictures, and a little more noise typical of a cameraphone, but i cannot see much difference in sharpness and overall quality terms from the original firmware.
Its a matter of opinion however.
_________________
This message was posted from a desktop computer
[ This Message was edited by: etaab on 2005-07-05 23:34 ] |
Beso.1
Joined: Jun 16, 2005
Posts: 2
PM |
I bought my K750 few days ago and yesterday my camera stop working. I can't even open it. I open the lens but camera doesn’t start.
Any help, suggestions.
Thanks. |
etaab
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK - South Yorkshire
PM |
Its a known bug, where the softare for the camera does not install correctly.
Try updating the phone again, and again, and again until fixed. If it doesnt do it after a few attempts, you'll probably need to send the phone to a service centre for repair.
Check me out on Instagram ! search for etaab ! |
mario2002
Joined: Feb 15, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Jeffrey's-Bay ,South Africa
PM, WWW
|
Sell that junk and save your self lots of frustration. Wait for the non existent P1000 or N90 if you want a working camera phone.Greetings from South Africa. Mario
This message was posted from a Nokia 7650 |
etaab
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK - South Yorkshire
PM |
Thats a truely helpful post there mario2002, you're a valid Esato member !
yawn.
Check me out on Instagram ! search for etaab ! |
etaab
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK - South Yorkshire
PM |
I took another picture yesterday. In the same spot, same time of day, and pretty much same conditions. The only difference is, yesterday morning there was a little haze, or morning mist you get in hot summer mornings - you can see it down the road.
Picture taken 29/5/05, R1A firmware, 553kb: (Original)
Latest picture, taken 10/07/05, R1J firmware, 383kb:
@ numb - as you can see, the colours of the road, the house roof and distant window are pretty much the same as the first picture, because they were taken at almost exactly the same time of day. The only difference is the grass is greener due to it being summer, not late spring when i took the original.
Still, its not a perfect comparison, but this picture shows that theres little difference in pictures other than filesize IMO when using later firmware revisions.
The latest picture is slightly blurred too, but that was me shaking the camera at the time (i remember thinking "this is gonna come out blurry")
_________________
http://www.werenotafraid.com
[ This Message was edited by: etaab on 2005-07-11 09:52 ] |
|
|
Posted: 2005-07-02 05:19
