camera resolution - is it really that bad?

first off, love my T600...saw someone's signature that alluded to the T300 looking like a garage door opener, and after carrying around the 600 for about 2 weeks now, I can definitely concur.

Anyway, my question to the public here is does the resolution on this camera suck as bad as I think it does? I take pictures with it, and haven't seen pixelation like this since Atari. Took a picture of my wife to use with her caller ID and I can barely make out her face.

Somebody else let me know what you think about the camera...it wasn't the top reason I bought the T600, but it would still be nice to get the full effect out of this phone.

S

It's really not the camera...it's the resolution of the Treo screen. Pics look "not so great" on 160x160. Transfer them over to your PC, and I bet they look much better.

yeah, pictures taken with the camera don't look very good at all on the screen..but in actuality, can be pretty good - under the right conditions - on your pc.

The camera needs a lot of light, and low contrast, in order to produce good results.

Check out my photoblog - all pictures taken with the 600.

Picture quality and resolution are separate issues, really. 640x480 pictures taken on a good camera can look excellent, as long as you don't try to enlarge the image beyond its native resolution.

If a digital camera takes poor-quality pictures, it's due to some combination of the lens, sensor, and firmware, and not the resolution.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by brio59 [/i]
[B]Picture quality and resolution are separate issues, really. 640x480 pictures taken on a good camera can look excellent, as long as you don't try to enlarge the image beyond its native resolution.

If a digital camera takes poor-quality pictures, it's due to some combination of the lens, sensor, and firmware, and not the resolution. [/B][/QUOTE]

Agreed. There is a lot of misunderstanding due to the marketing companies do. Higher resolution means "bigger picture" not "better picture".

thank you all for your insight. Even when I open up the picture on my PC it still sucks, but maybe I'll play around with it a bit to see if I can enhance the image on my phone.

no need to post further replies here, at least for my edification.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by brio59 [/i]
[B]Picture quality and resolution are separate issues, really. 640x480 pictures taken on a good camera can look excellent, as long as you don't try to enlarge the image beyond its native resolution.

If a digital camera takes poor-quality pictures, it's due to some combination of the lens, sensor, and firmware, and not the resolution. [/B][/QUOTE]Woo hoo! Another person that get's it. I don't know how many posts I wasted trying to explain this weeks ago.

The bottom line for the Treo 600 is that pictures are usually pretty bad but can be decent given the right lighting. Additionally, resolution is not sharp at 640x480, so you'll actually have sharper pictures if you resize your 640x480 photos to something smaller.

Scott

I saw the picture comparison between p900, XDAII and treo 600. treo600 is the worst, it has no definition whatsoever.

XDA camera can record video with voice btw.

Here's my photoblog. All taken with the T600. Some in good light, some in poor light, and some in really bad light. Should give you a clue as to the capability of the camera.

[URL=http://rtu.textamerica.com/]Alpha Geek's Real Time Ugly[/URL]

How does this one look?

Typical?

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by purpleX [/i]
[B]I saw the picture comparison between p900, XDAII and treo 600. treo600 is the worst, it has no definition whatsoever.

XDA camera can record video with voice btw. [/B][/QUOTE]I'm not sure there's a clear winner in this bunch. They're all pretty bad, but the Treo 600 holds its own. The Nokia 3650's camera is noticeably better than all of these.

Scott

No, it's very bad, treo600 camera has no definition whatsoever on any light condition except outdoor daylight. Everything is blurry.


se the ppcsg.com comparison yourself.

Comparisons should only be made on two phones taking the same picture. (i.e. holding both device at same time and snapping from same spot) don't give us these bullsh*t propaganda comparisons.

you haven't look at the picture have you? :rolleyes:

(why do you think the guy put the plastic credit card into each image? Hey maybe they are fake photoshop pictures. You know, from SonyEricsson and Microsoft propaganda department.)

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by purpleX [/i]
[B]you haven't look at the picture have you? :rolleyes:[/B][/QUOTE]Probably because you didn't supply I decent link. I went to the home page, couldn't find anything, and didn't feel like wasting any more of my time trying to find it. After this latest post of yours I went back, searched the forums, and found it. Here's the thread with comparison shots:
[url]http://www.ppcsg.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=25500[/url]

My thoughts:
1) They're all bad. Really bad. Just in different ways. The Nokia 3650's camera blows them all away.
2) All of these cameras (AFAIK) use fixed focus lenses. These are fairly close shots which may not be within the optimal focal range of the Treo 600. I'd like to see some comparisons taken outside of something slightly farther away.

Scott

I havent yet even snapped a picture with my 600, everything is so bad that i dont even snapp the pictures that I am trying to take. What I did was take some pictures for my picture caller ID with a firends palm pilot that has a very good resolution camera then I beamed it to my treo, it wasnt as good on the screen because of the treos low resolution screen, but it was so much better and clearer than if I wouldve done it with the treo camera.

Well, I just became a believer! The phone's screen resolution can make the pics look terrible, but you know what? When you send them and view them on a PC, they look downright GOOD! I was shocked at the difference.

For those that look at the phone and say, "these pics suck!", try and mail one to a PC and then give us your opinion. I bet you will be pleasantly surprised!

Craig

Here's an ourdoors comparison shot.
Treo 600
[url]http://www.houseofthud.com/images/northfire-phone.jpg[/url]
Not too bad.. but this'll ruin the illusion.
Coolpix 990
[url]http://www.houseofthud.com/images/northfire2.jpg[/url]

However, as stated above the image looks truly dreadful on the Treo's screen. I think it *could* actually be rendered better but isn't. If I judged whether to keep a shot or not based on what it looked like on the screen, I'd throw everything away. I was pleasantly surprised by what I got above.

The other big factor with using this camera is that the CMOS sensor has a very low dynamic range. If the scene has light areas and dark areas, try to keep it centered somewhere in between, otherwise you'll blow out the lights or blacken the darker areas. How you frame the shot will have a lot to do with how good it looks. If I'd aimed the above shot 10 degrees higher, the ground would have been black. 10 degrees lower, the clouds and sky totally white.

Indoors, in low and contrastly light is where this camera really suffers. Focus at the edges of the frame is also pretty bad, and there's noticeable vinetting at the corners in all shots.
Treo 600 indoors natural light through window
[url]http://www.houseofthud.com/images/sting-phone.jpg[/url]
Coolpix 990 indoors halogen lights
[url]http://www.houseofthud.com/rc/sting1.jpg[/url]

Don't buy this phone just for its camera. In fact, don't buy *any* phone just for its camera. Even the cheapest CCD digital camera will blow them all away.

ian

Dejavu!
Wasn't ALL of this discussed numerous times already.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by stephman [/i]
[B]Dejavu!
Wasn't ALL of this discussed numerous times already. [/B][/QUOTE]

Welcome to the Treo 600 forums!

Why don't we start another thread about which is the best email program for the Treo....that's only been asked what, twice so far today? ;)

So what!!!!!! If you were so concerned about the waste of time to, you shouldn't have posted your criticism!

[B]Dejavu![/B] [B]Wasn't ALL of this discussed numerous times already. [/B]

Since the Treo600 picture sofware is used to create pictures, along with the lens, I wonder something. Could someone come up with better software to make the existing lens take better pictures on the Treo600?

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by mo-bile [/i]
[B]

Welcome to the Treo 600 forums!

Why don't we start another thread about which is the best email program for the Treo....that's only been asked what, twice so far today? ;) [/B][/QUOTE]

Lol.

To the thread starter, I apologize for thread crapping.
It's just that lately, the server for the forums seems to be responding very slow. So it's been agrivating trying to read up on the latest post.
I'm a GSM user, so the wait for the Treo 600 GSM has me acting a bit nutty.
Plus in my opinion, the search feature for the forums seems a bit lacking. I've been to other forums where the search function has more features which allows the user to pinpoint what they're looking for allot easier...MODS, can the search function be updated here?

So to the thread starter and everyone else who has posted in this thread, my apologies for snapping.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by csherman [/i]
[B]So what!!!!!! If you were so concerned about the waste of time to, you shouldn't have posted your criticism!

[B]Dejavu![/B] [B]Wasn't ALL of this discussed numerous times already. [/B] [/B][/QUOTE]

I see no criticism in what I posted. I see nothing in my post which stated that I was concerned about the waste of time to myself.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Daemon [/i]
[B]Here's an ourdoors comparison shot.
Treo 600
[url]http://www.houseofthud.com/images/northfire-phone.jpg[/url]
Not too bad.. but this'll ruin the illusion.
Coolpix 990
[url]http://www.houseofthud.com/images/northfire2.jpg[/url]
[/B][/QUOTE]

Interesting. Two related comments. First, the coolpix photo is 73 kB whereas the treo photo is around 30k. Second, much of the detail in this photo, such as the trees and edges of the buildings, is high frequency and contains sharp changes from pixel to pixel. Such information will be filtered out by the jpeg encoder if the compression setting is too aggressive.

The treo SDK contains an API for adjusting the compression ratio of the JPEG compressor. I wonder how your picture would have looked with a lower compression factor (ie better quality).

In other words, it would be neat to tune the compression factor of the treo such that this same picture ends up around 73 kB, and then compare with the coolpix. I think the coolpix would still win, but the results would still be interesting. As a developer, I would like to know if the compression ratio is the primary reason for the discrepancy, or if it is the camera itself.

PS: with the software that ships with the treo, there is no way for you to test this.

H

You're right -- I stand corrected. You just took time out of your day to be critical of others. My mistake.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by stephman [/i]
[B]

I see no criticism in what I posted. I see nothing in my post which stated that I was concerned about the waste of time to myself. [/B][/QUOTE]

What's sad about the criticism is the fact that it doesn't matter how good they are, people will complain until they match my old Canon G1 3 megapixel camera with similar optics.

The camera does good in good lighting and sucks bad in low-lighting or lighting behind the subject. Arguing about one crappy phone's camera over another is for people who have no experience using digital cameras.

Now arguing that it needs a flash is worthy. This would be nice as a sd card.

********
I noticed a work-around for low-light conditions where you get blue dots. You have the phone in camera mode, switch to "pics file mode" and then back to camera mode. This readjusts the brightness/contrast of the optic and before it goes too high, take the picture. It's not good, but it's a lot better then having a bunch of blue dots. You still need some lighting to get this to work.
********

bigH's,
I would agree with you. I think it could be improved in a lot of ways. One's probably compression, but I had several pics from my T600 that were 70KB. His T600 pic just had very little info around the edges. That makes the file much smaller. I would like to see settings for adjustments to handle how much the camera tries to take in light (brightness/contrast) before the picture is taken. There's no editor that'll be able to enhance a pic if it's got blue dots or is blurry or something.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Daemon [/i]
[B]
Don't buy this phone just for its camera. In fact, don't buy *any* phone just for its camera. Even the cheapest CCD digital camera will blow them all away.

ian [/B][/QUOTE]

Excellent point! Now ... make a phone call or check the web or your email with your Coolpix 990. Ohhhhh ... tradeoffs do abound! :D

Notice how the 600 photo was taken later in the day and in lower light conditions. I would like to see a comparison photo taken withen minutes of each other.

Look at the clouds and notice the patterns. You can tell this is taken at different times of the day.

A picture taken by the SonyEricsson T616 in low lighting

( doh! forgot to attach picture. can't attach during an edit. can't delete the post :-( )

(take 2)
Same picture with Treo600

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Daemon [/i]
[B]Here's an ourdoors comparison shot.
Treo 600
[url]http://www.houseofthud.com/images/northfire-phone.jpg[/url]
Not too bad.. but this'll ruin the illusion.
Coolpix 990
[url]http://www.houseofthud.com/images/northfire2.jpg[/url][/B][/QUOTE]


The Treo 600 photo absolutely KILLS the Nikon's. But then again, I prefer Impressionism over Realism...

Handspring probably forgot to include the menu to switch the camera's digital effects from "Impressionism" to "Normal". A software patch should fix everything.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by The Zen of Palm [/i]
[B]The Treo 600 photo absolutely KILLS the Nikon's. But then again, I prefer Impressionism over Realism...[/B][/QUOTE]It's funny you should say that. I was actually thinking a while back after seeing some of the Treo 600 photos that the pictures had an almost "oil painting" look to them. If used creatively to accentuate that, you could probably take some interesting photos with it.

Scott

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Scott R [/i]
[B]It's funny you should say that. I was actually thinking a while back after seeing some of the Treo 600 photos that the pictures had an almost "oil painting" look to them. If used creatively to accentuate that, you could probably take some interesting photos with it.

Scott [/B][/QUOTE]


"It's not a bug - it's a feature!"

Seriously though, if you're going to bother putting a camera on a phone, at least make it take half-decent pictures. Emailing friends blurry, smudged photos takes the "coolness" out of the whole convergence thing. The Monet-Cam is REALLY bad. They could have probably spent an extra $5 and put in a better sensor (I assume it's a CMOS unit).

We probably don't want to open up this can of worms again, but before someone jumps in with the "If you want a good camera, buy a 3MP digital camera," I'm assuming that The Zen of Palm is of the same mindset as me and that we aren't expecting or asking for high-end digital camera quality, just quality as good as the best cameraphones. If someone here has access to both a Treo 600 and Nokia 3650, I'd love to see some shots comparing the same scenes. I've seen a lot of 3650 photos on the web and my impression is that it's one of the better cameras out there (though still far from stellar), and I'm pretty sure it was out for a good 9 months before the Treo 600 came out.

Scott

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Scott R [/i]
[B]We probably don't want to open up this can of worms again, but before someone jumps in with the "If you want a good camera, buy a 3MP digital camera," I'm assuming that The Zen of Palm is of the same mindset as me and that we aren't expecting or asking for high-end digital camera quality, just quality as good as the best cameraphones. If someone here has access to both a Treo 600 and Nokia 3650, I'd love to see some shots comparing the same scenes. I've seen a lot of 3650 photos on the web and my impression is that it's one of the better cameras out there (though still far from stellar), and I'm pretty sure it was out for a good 9 months before the Treo 600 came out.

Scott [/B][/QUOTE]

Exactly. I've also used a Sony Ericsson T610 and even it takes better pictures - but they're half the size of the Treo 600's. A 0.3 MP camera can easily take photos that look decent on the web or in emails. No one's expecting a smartphone to have a 6 MP monster that can take almost film-quality, printable photos.

For what it's meant to do.

Was at the Palm Beach Wiffle Ball World Series (I was an ump) and thought you might like a few photos.

Opening ceremonies ... Dave O'Brien with the mike and Gary Carter in the maroon shirt

2 minor league mascots ...

Billy the Marlin