Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 41
  1.    #21  
    I'll have to try that one out. I've settled on the 320 x 240 format for screen display photos.
    <a href="http://billkosloskymd.typepad.com/wirelessdoc/">Wireless Doc the blog</a>
  2.    #22  
    Pda Jedi – For steadying your hand, practice will do wonders. For awhile I was photographing the newspapers at the newstands and realized that it is possible to work this problem out. If you get into the habit of photographing just about anything and everything you’ll make tremendous progress. This is a welcomed change from when you had worry about the cost of film.

    Silversufer – Thanks. I can imagine a day sometime soon when people won’t buy separate digital cameras. And, I have made prints from my shots with no pixelation whatsoever, despite those guides that tell you how megapixels translates into print quality.

    Bioart – After picking up the 650, I have more ideas and certainly the photographic process is more fun. One idea that I’ve been playing with that I think other people should try out is the concept of a series of photos creating a narrative or telling a story. I did that a few times with the 600, but now it much less painful.

    VPW – Will try out the 320 setting. I didn’t think that it worked that way which is why I didn’t experiment with it.
    <a href="http://billkosloskymd.typepad.com/wirelessdoc/">Wireless Doc the blog</a>
  3.    #23  
    I shot some tests using the 640 vs. 320 setting on the 650.

    The 640 setting with scaling afterwards is definitely better, but not by much.
    <a href="http://billkosloskymd.typepad.com/wirelessdoc/">Wireless Doc the blog</a>
  4. #24  
    Interesting.

    It appears sharper, though of course it truly isn't. So perhaps there is some optimization going on.

    I'm getting better, though. It makes a difference to know that the pic is taken on button release.

    Tom
  5.    #25  
    I'll probably wind up using the 320 setting when I know that I'm posting the image directly from the 650 to my blog via flickr.

    Glad you pointed this out.
    <a href="http://billkosloskymd.typepad.com/wirelessdoc/">Wireless Doc the blog</a>
  6. #26  
    doc - Did you adjust the camera app's .jpg compression value with Qset or similar?
  7.    #27  
    I get plenty of e-mails from people asking about this.

    I tend to think that my method of shooting (more like choosing scenes) leads to images that have less compression artifacts. Doing things like simplifying the subject matter helps. Maybe I'm wrong.

    Plus, this creates larger files for what good reason? I won't be blowing these images up to 8x10.
    <a href="http://billkosloskymd.typepad.com/wirelessdoc/">Wireless Doc the blog</a>
  8. #28  
    What leads to compression artifacts is compression. Snapping simple scenes with less details does help. The reason for larger image files is higher image quality at native resolution. This produces better results when scaling to both larger and smaller image sizes.

    Odd that someone whose profession involves "hacking" humans would be reticent about a software hack
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1of2
    What leads to compression artifacts is compression. Snapping simple scenes with less details does help. The reason for larger image files is higher image quality at native resolution. This produces better results when scaling to both larger and smaller image sizes.

    Odd that someone whose profession involves "hacking" humans would be reticent about a software hack
    It's called a Hobby?

    I have a good friend that is a Doctor but he is also a great mechanic and races cars in the dragstrip periodically. I remember him telling me that it shouldn't surprise me that he was better than most mechanics because he was more "detail-oriented" and does more "troubleshooting" on a daily basis than anyone else.

    Thanks Wireless-Doc for the new tips on the T650 Phonecam. I'm one of your original fans. Even with my Treo 600 I have created some nice full screensavers (for my computer) with only a few Photoshop clicks!
    Ed
    Visor Deluxe, Prism, Visorphone, Treo 270, Treo 600, Treo 650, and am eagerly waiting for the next generation Treo...but wait...is that the iPhone????
  10.    #30  
    10f2: I have respect for people who can find workarounds, it's just that I don't see photography in terms of fixing images using software.

    Treo Rat: Thanks. My father used to spent countless hours tying flies for freshwater fishing. He developed a complete set of rules of what and what was not acceptable. In essence, all this was about trying to fool some dumb brook trout.

    And with the Treo, the convenience factor is amazing.

    BTW, Howard Stern said that he would be checking out the 650 today at a meeting. I hope he's up for the challenge.
    <a href="http://billkosloskymd.typepad.com/wirelessdoc/">Wireless Doc the blog</a>
  11. #31  
    When you scale an image from 640x480 to 320x240 to get better image qualtiy at the lower res, youre "fixing" the image using a software "workaround".
  12.    #32  
    That I can do by batch processing in Macromedia Fireworks. This is back in the day of using the Treo 600 where I couldn't judge the quality of the image on the Treo's screen so I know I had to look at it on a PC. Plus, on the 600 you don't have to option of 320 x 240, only 160 x 120.

    BTW, the Palm Desktop now has a photoediting program where you can do some rudimentary image editing including scaling. It works pretty well.

    I'm just afraid that if I have it in my mind that I can "improve" the image quality by decreasing compression, I won't work that hard to try to get the best lighting. That's the challenge I enjoy. But, if someone tells me that they can get qset to work reliably on the Treo 650, I'm more than willing to test it.
    <a href="http://billkosloskymd.typepad.com/wirelessdoc/">Wireless Doc the blog</a>
  13. #33  
    wireless-doc, your pics are absolutely stunning!

    There is something you said in an earlier post that really hit home for me:
    Quote Originally Posted by wireless-doc
    Again, it might take 5 or 6 attempts to get a workable image—delete the rest after you load them onto your PC.
    That is so true for me -- for every five shots I take, only one will be viewable. Sometimes, it's 1 out of 10!

    Thanks for sharing your tips and tricks. I don't have a "photographer's eye" when it comes to picking shots, but practice will make perfect. Or at least, practice will make better.

    Some of my own shots (no retouching, just shoot and post):


    http://tanster.smugmug.com/photos/12257855-S.jpg http://tanster.smugmug.com/photos/12248751-S.jpg

    http://tanster.smugmug.com/photos/11644059-S.jpg http://tanster.smugmug.com/photos/11640399-S.jpg
    tanster
    Treo 650 on Sprint, as of 11/18/04!
    • To transfer data from your current Palm device to the Treo 650, click here.
    • To see my Treo 650 pics, click here.
  14.    #34  
    Tanster: Thanks. I think that when you can see potential photographs in the everyday objects around you, as you're doing, you can practice a lot more. This is how you improve your "eye." I like the colors and shapes in your photos.

    Some suggestions: the palm desktop software has an "enhance" function which seems to clean up the whites by boosting contrast, and sometimes it does a great job on color too. The shots with the best lighting, don't change at all when you apply this filter, so you don't need to use it for all of your photos. And, I'd remove the date stamp on the photos. The date is automatically inserted into the file name.
    <a href="http://billkosloskymd.typepad.com/wirelessdoc/">Wireless Doc the blog</a>
  15. #35  
    I can't tell any difference. They both stink. At least it looks like a picture. My other camera phones don't even take legible pictures. I guess I am spoiled because I use a Nikon 8700 to shoot around with.
  16. #36  
    doc, i am very impressed with your photographs. your eye is impeccable.

    are all these photos straight from your camera? or have they been processed? (photoshop, elements, fireworks...etc)

    My biggest problem i suppose is that the exposure settings are way too sensitive to backlighting and top lighting. whenever it senses backlight it turns down the exposure so much that my subject is underexposed. i guess i'll have to work with the camera on this.

    i just wish there were exposure controls our camera. I wouldnt mind a washed out background if my subject would be correctly done.

    one other thing that probably is leading to my dismay is the soft focus. I have tried taking pictures of text for practice and I just cant get it right. I seriously think that my lens may be out of focus

    lastly, do you use a case? how do you protect the lens of your camera?
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1of2
    doc - Did you adjust the camera app's .jpg compression value with Qset or similar?

    QSet does not work with Treo 650, the camera app ignores the QSet setting (the camera API's for the T600 and T650 are different)
  18. #38  
    how do you do it! so stable!
  19. #39  
    Any chance that the developer of QSet would consider updating it for the Treo650? I wouldn't mind paying ~$5 for an improved (less compressed) output from my Tre 650 camera. I'm sure there would be other similar minded people who could make it worthwhile for a developer to do this....
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by nishmit
    Any chance that the developer of QSet would consider updating it for the Treo650? I wouldn't mind paying ~$5 for an improved (less compressed) output from my Tre 650 camera. I'm sure there would be other similar minded people who could make it worthwhile for a developer to do this....
    Howdy. I created qset. I also created the image manipulaton and jpeg libraries that are in the 600, which is why I knew how to create qset (PS sorry for the all the blue pixels, unfortunately, the image comes from the camera that way).

    QSet doesn't work in the 650 because the old imaging library doesn't seem to be used by the camera app. As for upgrading qset, I don't own a 650, nor am I familiar with the new imaging libraries. I don't know if it is even possible to alter the compression factor that is applied to photos on the newer devices.

    Sorry.
    H
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions