Camera Phone Tips 286
Darren writes "It is getting hard to find a cell phone WITHOUT a camera in it - as a result millions are flooding the internet through moblogs with camera phone images - many of which are poor quality.
I'm sick of seeing poor quality camera phone images being posted to moblogs and so have collected a series of camera phone tips and links that will hopefully help us all improve our camera phone images."
My tips (Score:5, Interesting)
- Take a lot of pics in different modes
- Don't be afraid to throw away the crap ones
- Don't trust the display on the phone, your monitor has a lot better quality.
Just a few simple but handy tips I use
Other problem... (Score:5, Interesting)
Wanted: (Score:3, Interesting)
I know that most slashdotters can't help me but this is just something for that someone who may be in the right place at a camera manufacturer.
what we need is Kodak... (Score:1, Interesting)
Gym (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Want high-quality? Get a real camera! (Score:5, Interesting)
but for mobility, i love my camera phone. the number of times i have my phone but no other camera seems to increase. but the real bonus of having a camera in my phone is that i get a good insurance policy from my phone company (orange) so i am never afraid to take it out with me when i go drinking. i'd never be that fearless with a camera costing lots more.
oh - and lets not forget that it's probably only a matter of time before mobile phones get camera compnents the quality of a good digital camera - it'll only get better!
I like the lowtech charme of camphones. (Score:4, Interesting)
Btw: Here's my "moblog" [blissx.co.uk], more pics here [blissx.co.uk].
Please feel free to ignore the mistakes in the lyrics. I am german and not a native speaker!
Fine to a point (Score:3, Interesting)
As a neat toy or way to document sudden events, the phone is certainly good enough, but if you find yourself bitten by the photography bug, you really should take the plunge and get a semi-serious camera. No need to get some hideosuly expensive, huge monstrosity with removable lenses or anything; a mid-price camera with good optics, good resolution (5-6 megapixels) and decent control over the image taking will go a very, very long way. It is of course true that equipment never is a substitute for talent, but, on the other hand, lack of decent equipment certainly doesn't help either.
need non-camera phones (Score:5, Interesting)
Camera phones suck (now) (Score:4, Interesting)
The quality of camera phones out there now is way worse than the quality of very cheap digital cameras 6 years ago. Granted, the Kodak DC120 swimming in my desk drawer could probably whoop my V400's ass, it's also enormous.
Back to my point; there will be better camera phones in the next year, I've seen some (Samsung?) which will have macro mode and "real" flashes. The closest I've seen to a camphone with a flash was one that used white LED's and that was only as a framing aid.
Bottom line: don't waste your money now unless like me, you don't care about the quality of the camera because the phone is the primary function. If you want good quality, give it till the end of the year.
I'm surprised that there isn't a website (like www.imaging-resource.com) that reviews the actual camera of the phone and gives concise reviews based on quality, light sensitivity and optics. I guess camphones are still too much of a niche market for that.
Re:Camera phones are silly (Score:5, Interesting)
Pardon?
All I can think of is that you must be in the US. In Europe, I would go so far as to say that the primary use of many mobiles sold is for text messaging. I know I send far more texts than I make voice calls.
I can't speak for Japan, but I believe there's a similar situation there. I thought that the US was going the same way, but I'm prepared to be corrected on that.
As for cameras being silly, I disagree. I often take around ten a week, and I imagine I'm only in the midrange. The reason? I have children, and I very often don't have my full-blown 5mp digital camera with me but do have my mobile on me. Snaps of my kids playing in the park are good fun for those who are interested, and utterly dull for the rest of the world. Some get kept, most get discarded.
I have other uses too. For example, on Friday an A4 sheet had been left at a railway station detailing proposed changes to the timetable and who to get in contact with to protest them (the changes are bad from this town's point of view - Maidenhead). There was only one sheet left, so I took a couple of photos with the phone and left the sheet there for someone else to pick up. I read the information later on my laptop after transferring the pictures there.
The combination of a camera phone which is bluetooth equipped and having a bluetooth'n'wifi equipped laptop (that works - I use a Powerbook, I've heard of terrible problems with MS's stack and Nokia phones) immediately opens up a world of fast snapping, fast editing and fast publishing. Don't knock camera phones - they're useful things.
Cheers,
Ian
Re:This too will pass... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know what's happened to make me so curmudgeonly. I used to love new technology.
Re:Gym (Score:3, Interesting)
Being on call is one thing but I think some people are owned by their mobile phones instead of it being the other way around. They interrupt their training, conversation, shower, anything, whenever the phone rings. Then they shout into the phone with the entire city listening. Really, sometimes you need to shut the damn thing off and enjoy some privacy.
Re:Too many features, (Score:5, Interesting)
The public should take note, too. (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm an employee and I'll get stopped if I have a camera, something I occasionally carry in to document the state of a comm closet or for other business-related reasons. From me, they'll accept "I need it for work today." From the public, they'll entertain no excuses.
General rule for U.S. federal buildings: If the building is big enough to have full time guards, metal detectors, and an xray machine, leave the camera phone (and digital voice recorder, too) in the car.
I don't want no blinkin' camera-phone (Score:3, Interesting)
Have you tried to find a high-end GSM phone (Tri-band, GPRS and Bluetooth, decent contact manager and calendar, etc. etc.) without a camera lately? It's simply impossible if you want a recent model.
So I ended up buying another Ericsson R520m phone [expansys.com]. It's gone out of production years ago but it still does the job I need done better than any other phone I've been able to find.
Here's one reason why... (Score:3, Interesting)
I take pics with mine a lot -- most of the time they're cutsie pics to send to my girlfriend of interesting things I see. The one real useful thing I do with it is snap pictures of things I see in a store I want to look up online later and get for cheaper.
There have been more than one book I've snapped a photo of so I could look up later.
Now, its kind of stupid to blame the use of the phone since I could write them down too, but maybe thats their logic.
Camera Phone image tests (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I see phones w/o cameras all the time (Score:3, Interesting)
The network share has been static as people's social groups since most charged 4x more for calling another network than their own. Things are beginning to change now though, despite the regulator sitting on it's hands.
Re:Want high-quality? Get a real camera! (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd actually say that's unlikely. Part of the problem with current digital cameras is that their sensors aren't big enough, and thus you wind up having a lens focusing a tiny amount of light onto the sensor.
Now, in 5 years I'm sure that you will have cell phone/PDAs with fairly high resolution cameras. But there's still going to be a lot of situations where it will be difficult to take a decent picture because:
- lack of light and no flash
- lack of ability to control aperature/shutter speed
- problems focusing
If this was all about megapixels, the 2MP camera-phones wouldn't take pictures far shittier than my years old 1.3MP digicam could.
Re:Here is a good tip... (Score:3, Interesting)
The other person usually opts to call back later unless it's something urgent, in which case the message is stated, then the conversation stops.
Re:Too many features, (Score:3, Interesting)
I really don't understand these types of comments. Although I've always heard no one actually TALKS on their "mobile" in Europe because everyone is sending millions upon millions of SMS messages. If that's all you're doing then, yes, I can understand how your phone can last a week on a single charge. We have better devices for that function over here. They're called Blackberries.
Stateside, since we don't really "do" SMS over here, we talk on our phones and that uses a LOT more battery. I know three people who use more than 1,600 minutes a month of talk time on their cells. I average around 1,200 myself. Show me a phone that can handle 1,000 cellular minutes a month and only be charged 4 times in that month and I'll... I'll... well I don't know what I'll do because Nextel doesn't carry it!
Re:Camera phones are silly (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes and no. Until about 2 years ago, you were correct. SMS messaging didn't really cross systems. Now, however, that's no longer the case. GSM is pretty danged widespread in the US now, although it still gets badmouthed. I've used GSM off and on for a long time, and while it still doesn't have total marketshare, it has almost total coverage of the country.
But mainly, a lot of providers have put relays and compatible systems and such in place, with the upshot being that text messages now nearly always get through, regardless of the system. There's still a few problems with it in a few cases, but it's universal enough that you're 99% sure the message will get to its destination.
Doesn't help, really, it's a different mindset thing. Yes, text is bigger than it was 2 years ago, but it will never be as big a deal as it is in Europe. Oh, they keep trying to push it, but the public on this side of the pond just ain't buying it. Some of the more notable attempts to push text messaging include text message only communications devices, with little flip screens and keypads in cool colors. Mainly aimed at young women, judging by the designs. This makes it be seen as a fad, and few use texting on a regular basis. Except to have the sports scores or other similar information sent to them automatically, which is about 80-85% of the text use in the US.
People in the US love to talk, and they mainly use the phone for that purpose. WAP isn't taking off too well here either, but it's relatively new to the market around here, really. It's just easier to obtain information on the go via other channels than it is to fire up a WAP browser on your phone and get it.
Cell phones are *huge* over here, but for talking, not for anything else. Believe me, if you hit any mall in the states, you'd see what I mean instantly. Every girl under 16 has a phone and a pricing plan designed for power chatting. Scary, really.
Re:Funny but true. (Score:1, Interesting)
At least one perosn believed me though.
How oculd a little pager send out a radio signla stong enough to reach th etower. It can't but hey, I troll, slashdots mod without research. it is the way things work.
Re: Other problem... (Score:3, Interesting)
They did let me have it back at the end of the day