Related
I am pretty much dissapointed with the pictures I have obtained with my Universal's built in camera.
Sometimes - most of the times - dont really beleive it is a 1.3 MPixels cam.
So,
1. Do you think using another software to take pictures would improve performance/quality?
2. It is possible to use another software to manage the camera?
3. Maybe, it's just me not being able to use it properly. Any advice to get good quality pictures?
have you checked the pictures on your pc?
i thought this until i looked on the pc and they were actually pretty impressive, dont be fooled my the on screen preview after youve taken a pic
yes... checked them out on a PC.. but no good quality. The problem is that if you're taking good quality pictures.. the it must be me.. :?
Anyway I recon that good pictures can be obtained under good conditions (light, etc.), but indoors... no way, at least for me.
i've seen on my HTC wizard that in the registery the camera can be edited things like bitrate too, havent tried it yet.
Ive gone from a D500 to this. Both 1.3 megapixel cameras, but the images from the samsung are far larger and far better quality. The images I get from my XDA are terrible.
maybe -hope so - it's just the software.
Could the camera be used with another soft? maybe from another WM5 device.
HTC has used extremely cheap and low quality camera sensors :-( Theres not much you can expect from its camera....so i guess its wise to accept the fact and move on :S
There are tons of dead pixels, and fails to reproduce the colors accurately...its just a "i have a cam on my phone too" feature, and nothing of any practical use!
cheerio
s
its enough to get the point across say car accident , for insurance or the poice, it would be enough to convince surlly.
Took some pictures yesterday for first time on Universal, on top of a hospital roof, sun shining.
So as normally happens in those situations you can not see what you are taking properly due to the screen contrast etc. in the sun. ( same on all camera phones I have had )
Just used the standard settings, didnt change anything, have just downloaded them onto the PC and I am quite impressed with the quality.
On par if not better than some of the camera phones I have had in the past.
Just checked settings and I was on 640 x 480 capture size and ambience auto.
So for me a thumbs up to the quality from a camera phone.
share one of those beautiful pics...
wanna check if it's just me..
Perhaps a silly question - but have you made sure your camera settings are at 2M (1200x1600) to take your photos. The exec defaults to a much smaller size.
cheers
hehe, yes.. thanks.
I'm just saying that quality doesnt fit in in a 1.3 Mpixels camera, my POV.
The camera is useless imho. sometimes its good to catch stupid pics of people who have parked terribly or funny signs on petrol station doors but all in all they would have been best just leaving it out.
The only solution is to get a decent camera.
JAmes
I'm an amateur photographer (with the lovely Nikon D50), and no doubt the Universal's picture quality is not very good. However, I see it as a bonus add-on for the Universal rather than a proper feature. Say, I don't carry the Nikon D50 into my lessons at school all the time (until recently, when we had our very last lessons at school for the rest of my life!); with the Universal I was able to quickly take pictures of my classmates sleeping in our maths lessons or film our chemistry teacher burning jelly babies (they literally scream and burn when they react with some solution!).
Anyway, my conclusion is that the camera on the Universal is good for quick snaps, but not good for family portraits. :wink:
PS: HTC, come on, you call yourselves "High Tech Computer Corporation" and you can't even manage a tiny camera?
Whilst on the topic, yesterday I tried to take pictures of a beautiful wheat field in the sun, but the picture I got was just a very dark image, no matter where the sun was relative to the lens. Changing the settings to "Sunlight" or "Automatic" did not help either.
Very disappointed, and you don't often get this lovely weather in the UK!
To the OP, there's no easy way to say it: the camera is crap, like 99.99% of all mobile phone cameras. The CCD they use are cheap as dirt, and unless you're experiencing optimum conditions (such as bright, bright sunshine outdoors), there's no way you'll ever take any decent pic with this phone regardless of the software.
Glad I could clear that up! :twisted:
It does not seem that bad to me,
settings = 2M(1600x1280) and daylight
I have not resized the pic , so sorry if it runs off screen :wink:
This is just before my ride to Turkey and back from UK
Stu..
Bagmanstu:
Nice outfit!
mdaexecfan said:
there's no way you'll ever take any decent pic with this phone regardless of the software.
Glad I could clear that up! :twisted:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly - it's a phone/PDA with a free camera, not a camera with a phone/PDA... Miracles you will not get!
The quality is acceptable to me but getting the best result is sometimes difficult. My major problem the handling, choosing the right settings for the occasion is a bit awkward.
@Bagmanstu: Cool
Hi,
in a German mobile phone journal I read a review on the Touch HD in which they claim that the camera is somewhat weak:
1. They say that it takes about 3 seconds between pressing to shoot the photo and actually shooting the photo.
2. They say that photos are blurred and out of focus.
Can someone of you that have the Touch HD confirm this? How is the quality of the camera?
I can confirm the 2-3 sec shutter lag on my hd. I wouldn't call the photos blurry, but of the same low mobile phone quality as many earlier generations. the 5mp are completely useless in my opinion, 2mp would be good enough. but the lag is really bad, pretty much rules out any snapshots or pics of moving objects...
I guess this is because of the autofocus working so slow.
It would be better if you could "point and shoot", e.g. as with normal cameras press the shutter half way to focus, and then press through. But I could not find out how to do it.
it says in the camera settings "main camera rear 3.2 mpcmos camera". (?)
i think the camera is fine as when you press shoot it takes a little bit of time to actually take the picture which gives you time to steady the phone in your hands(particularly as i have shaky hands) unlike regular cameras/camera phones when you lose some of the steadyness when pressing a physical shoot button.
quality wise they look fine no complaints here god willing.
..i have to admit that - among the marvelous things which i saw in the last 48 hours - the camera is the one that impressed me less. I really refer to the quality of images in low light conditions, the HTC cmos sensors have never been particularly brilliant and the touch HD is no exception in this respect (but it is in all the other aspects, in my opinion).
pzucchel said:
..i have to admit that - among the marvelous things which i saw in the last 48 hours - the camera is the one that impressed me less. I really refer to the quality of images in low light conditions, the HTC cmos sensors have never been particularly brilliant and the touch HD is no exception in this respect (but it is in all the other aspects, in my opinion).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks a lot to all the answers. Hmm, I wonder if this is possibly be cured by a software hack or later firmware, but I guess this is hardware related. Too bad. Still unsure between X1 and HD, and I know I would miss a hardware keyboard. Plus, the HD seems to be delayed in Germany ... And now this camera issues. I have to wait and see both live and compare them ...
Eriol
camera is not so bad. Considering that we are talking about a winmo device (the ONLY one with decent camera is samsung I900) I think HD takes brilliant photos when shooting with good light. It'S WAY better than any other HTC and slightly better than Sony Ericsson G900 (another 5mpx smartphone)
and is way back from X1 or Omnia.
ciao Eriol,
(I have a touch HD)
i think you are right: in the doubt, maybe better wait and see. I read about this issue of shooting delays, but actually I am not much sensitive since even with other telephones the time between thinking "i want to make a picture" and the actual picture is...10 seconds? it is very different from a real reflex camera, where in a fraction of a second you are there and the picture is in memory. I don't use the phone camera much, admittedly.
But once you will see a real one: the screen is really beautiful. I could read A4 pdf documents in full screen....by itself, to me is a quantum jump which is big enough to justify the choice.
You can see the picture quality in the attachment.
I's a Blackstone photo? Very good colors, I like'it.
kdomo said:
You can see the picture quality in the attachment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I made the photo, with my Touch HD.
And no PS?
kdomo said:
Yes, I made the photo, with my Touch HD.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kdomo said:
You can see the picture quality in the attachment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is one excellent picture...picture quality is really good
kdomo said:
You can see the picture quality in the attachment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That on 5MPX?
Information on it says
2592 x 1552 Pixels (4.02 MPixels)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
_Fly_ said:
And no PS?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whats the PS? Photoshop? No.
PS = Photoshop.
So this picture comes directly from the mobile and without manipulation? Very good, indeed.
kdomo said:
Whats the PS? Photoshop? No.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, 5 MPX. I am can not, why 4.02.
More picture directly from the mobile and without manipulation here:
http://kdomo.extra.hu/hd.zip
Well, these photos can already say that lack a bit of definition. Need sharpness.
_Fly_ said:
Well, these photos can already say that lack a bit of definition. Need sharpness.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No wonder, this comes from a ridiculous small sensor and cheap optics. But hey, this is not that bad!
Im dont know, every where I read, thay say that the cam is s..., and it takes 5 secs. from when I press till it takes the picture.
Is that right?
Stick with the Diamond, much better IMO. Only advantages of a HD is the bigger screen and more RAM, but I think the Diamond is much more useable.
To answer your question, that appears to be the case for me, yes.
"Only" the screen is a pretty major advantage, it's almost double the size. The Diamond isn't seriously usable for web browsing - the HD is. Ditto for video.
ChrisB said:
Im dont know, every where I read, thay say that the cam is s..., and it takes 5 secs. from when I press till it takes the picture.
Is that right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's rubbish and completely untrue. I find the camera to be quite excellent and picture quality very good in fact.
I don't blame you though for getting that impression. Before I got my own unit, I also had that false impression from reading all the complaints on this forum. But after getting my own HD, I'm really happy with it. This is despite not having flash.
eaglesteve said:
That's rubbish and completely untrue. I find the camera to be quite excellent and picture quality very good in fact.
I don't blame you though for getting that impression. Before I got my own unit, I also had that false impression from reading all the complaints on this forum. But after getting my own HD, I'm really happy with it. This is despite not having flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly the HTC Touch HD is a great phone. Some people reading forum like this think they get a good sampling of what people using the phone think about it. That is not true since it is mostly the maybe 1% that have troubles of some kind with their phone that write here. The rest of the people that are happy with their phone do not write about.
The only thing I can recommend for people considering buying the phone is to get the phone and try it out. You will most likely like it a lot.
Camera is not bad, but also not good. Don't buy it as a camphone.
I've got a nokia n82 and a touch hd.
If the cam is ****? Yeah, it is. Don't let people let you think different. I guess it's not worse than other htc-phones though, I haven't had one since the original touch (elf).
If it was daylight out here now (denmark, actually) I should have taken comparision shots for you, but it's not, and with the xenon flash on the n82 it is even more superior in this light.
That said, the touch hd is a fantastic device in every other aspect! I didn't buy it for the cam, and don't care about it's picture quality, since I've got my n82.
The camera is only suitable for taking pictures in well-lit area.
Forget about dark areas.
All in all I'm sufficiently pleased with it, as I did not expect anything great.
Hello
Yes the Cam is ****
very slow slow slow and it only does pictures in very light areas.
In the drak they are very dark - the missing flash is a desaster.
Do not buy the hd for taking pictures or videos
But also safe you monry on fu.. nokia modells
IMHO...
The quality of the photos that the Touch HD can take is far better than the three HTC devices I've used before. It's actually pretty good in my limited experience with it. However, the camera remains virtually unusable because of two things:
1 - the delay between tapping the screen and the photo taking the image while the camera fusses over the focussing and then thinks for a couple of seconds
2 - the lack of hardware button makes camera shake very hard to avoid
These two factors make it almost impossible to take a photo of a moving scene because of the unpredictability of the timing of the shot and the likelihood of camera shake.
Attached is a photo I've just taken in the low evening light that illustrates what should be a perfectly easy photo. I couldn't avoid camera shake even standing still and being ultra-careful. The exposure isn't bad though.
the cam is bad... only usable by normal daylight also video recording is very bad
well in normal daylight the cam is better than my n73. video is realy better...
Are there some tweaks or settings to speed up taking images? It's really slooooow...
TIP: Disable the "Auto Whiteness" in the camera.
I have spent the last 2 weeks playing with the camera and was very disappointed with low level lighting pictures at first, BUT! now I have ressolved this problem.
There is an option in the camera "Auto Whiteness", the sensor or software in the camera seems to be useless at judging lighting, so if you set this to manual and select the indoor lighting icon (looks like a light bulb) then the camera gives quite impressive low level lighting pictures.
Speed of the camera between pressing and taking a picture is about 3 seconds, not the worst shutter delay I have seen on a camera phone, but not the best. Hopefully HTC can address this with future software updates??
For me the main issue is the blurryness of virtually all pictures,
if its a picture of a person I have to ask them to be still, then I take a pic and then I have to ask them once more to be DEAD STILL.
Most people take stay still to mean don't walk off any where but with the Touch HD stay still means don't let one muscle move.
If you want a phone that takes decent picture then its not or you.
Its a multimedia phone (pics not included)
I have been playing with the HD for two days now, which meant finding all of the tweaks and then removing them until it works for me. The excellent tweak app (search for it here) recommends enabling the sport and burst modes of photo (works great) and then changing the maximum res to 3M (makes my phone crash!)
Anyway if you want to take really good SHAKE FREE pics the ONLY way is through the burst/sport options. The auto focus for the 'normal' cam is so crap that the shutter stays open forever. In sport or burst mode the camera has to ditch the refocus and just shoot - out of the 5 in sport or 30 in burst you will have two or 10 decent pictures. This was exactly the same on my old HTC P3900.
The video is still completely crap - although much improved if you shoot as for MMS.
If we're talking about very low light, even my Canon camera does not give good result. So I don't expect miracle from HD. Having said that, I have taken quite a lot of indoor shots with lights on and the result is not noticeably worst than what my Canon camera can deliver.
As for motion, I actually don't find any problem there. I have taken quite many shots with car moving towards and away from me and the sharpness is still there. No blurring at all.
I find vido recording to be really good.
The lack of hardware button is a non-issue for me. I find it very easy to just touch the screen, the try to hold it still for the process to be completed.
This is the best camera I've ever had in a phone, and I find myself using it quite a lot since getting my HD.
This is seriously the worst camera I've ever had in a phone. And the sad part is the auto focus which is way too slow and cannot be disabled. No other tweak will help really unless somebody will figure out how to set focus to infinity permanently.
Attached are photos taken with the HTC Touch HD at night in New York City last week:
YESSSSSS IT SUCKSSSSSSS!
Auto light balance is useless, shutter speed is miserably slow (not even for a still photo) , no flash , video is worthless. 5 MP not in full screen (in full screen it is 4MP) .
If you have kids and want to take a photo for them then please wait till thy sleep and start shooting , other wise you will be wasting only your time and battery .
It is even too bad in watching movies without setting hours and hours converting them!
I hope it is not a hardware issue and only software that can be updated later .
No cam-mobile , yes surf-mobile and nav-mobile.
Hi guys. I was thinking about the camera of the ipaq 614c - it sucks. But is it the camera hardware or just the software. My gues is the software. I have tried Cool camera and the barcode recognition software Barcorama. It seems they both capture images from the camera and none of the blurry and distorted "effects" are present. The only problem is that Cool Camera doesn't work properly with the ipaq and the image is always rotated 90 degrees and shrinked
so it's no use for now. My question is : Is there a newer (and probably better) version of the Arc Soft camera software. As you know, they don't sell it as a separate piece of software - they sell it to manufactures to implement it into roms. I saw there are new versions that support image stabilization, smile detection and so on. Is there any phone that has that superior software and would it work with the ipaq camera.
axlastro said:
Hi guys. I was thinking about the camera of the ipaq 614c - it sucks. But is it the camera hardware or just the software. My gues is the software. I have tried Cool camera and the barcode recognition software Barcorama. It seems they both capture images from the camera and none of the blurry and distorted "effects" are present. The only problem is that Cool Camera doesn't work properly with the ipaq and the image is always rotated 90 degrees and shrinked
so it's no use for now. My question is : Is there a newer (and probably better) version of the Arc Soft camera software. As you know, they don't sell it as a separate piece of software - they sell it to manufactures to implement it into roms. I saw there are new versions that support image stabilization, smile detection and so on. Is there any phone that has that superior software and would it work with the ipaq camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, it's the hardware that sucks. No matter what soft u throw at it, u won't get better images. It's the lens that's in no relation with the CMOS-chip
Dirk
Are you sure
Yes, technically speaking, this is what causes most of the cameras to suck.
Lens aberation and so on. BUT.
I have some experience in photography and physics and the things i see here are not due to the lens (at least not only)
If you have noticed that some of the images get distorted in a strange way (something like a photoshop filter "twirl") - that's not the lens, as it happens only from time to time on some photos. I must say that blutty and coloured images on the edges are probably because of the lens, but the other things are due to poor software. I have taken images with still hands and they sometimes come out very well. But when you move even a little - the photo is blurry as hell.
So, if someone has an idea of an alternative camera App that might work, i'm willing to help with whatever I can - say can we make Cool camera work on the ipaq, or some other camera application extracted from another phone.
axlastro said:
Yes, technically speaking, this is what causes most of the cameras to suck.
Lens aberation and so on. BUT.
I have some experience in photography and physics and the things i see here are not due to the lens (at least not only)
If you have noticed that some of the images get distorted in a strange way (something like a photoshop filter "twirl") - that's not the lens, as it happens only from time to time on some photos. I must say that blutty and coloured images on the edges are probably because of the lens, but the other things are due to poor software. I have taken images with still hands and they sometimes come out very well. But when you move even a little - the photo is blurry as hell.
So, if someone has an idea of an alternative camera App that might work, i'm willing to help with whatever I can - say can we make Cool camera work on the ipaq, or some other camera application extracted from another phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
Yes, i'm sure ... As u say urself, even moving a little makes the pic blurry. In fact it's almost impossible to have a 'rocksteady' hand, cos of the relative high power u need to press the button. And again ; the lens is much to close on the chip and much to sharply bent to give good images. Just take a pic and look at it. U'll see that the sides are showing almost everything on the left or right from u. Looks like HP built a combined 28-35mm lens on 4mm²...
It's even better viewable when u take panoramapics ... then u get a kind of 'ondulated' result.
The only real solution would be : removing the lens and put something more apropriate in....
Dirk
Well that's an argument I wouldn't disagree with. I have noticed that "fish eye" effect in panoramic shots and the built-it blur effect on the edges of the image.
That's it - the camera is on par with an old 1.3Mpx siemens M75 and a lot suckier than the fixed focus cameras in samsung i600 and motorola Q9. Can't they learn it's not about the megapixels. Oh wait, they know it, but your average custumer doesn't. Whatever. Hp - never again dor a lot more reasons than the camera, which i actually don't use that much, but still...
axlastro said:
Well that's an argument I wouldn't disagree with. I have noticed that "fish eye" effect in panoramic shots and the built-it blur effect on the edges of the image.
That's it - the camera is on par with an old 1.3Mpx siemens M75 and a lot suckier than the fixed focus cameras in samsung i600 and motorola Q9. Can't they learn it's not about the megapixels. Oh wait, they know it, but your average custumer doesn't. Whatever. Hp - never again dor a lot more reasons than the camera, which i actually don't use that much, but still...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, you got it Even more surprising is the fact that HP has the techno for building decent pictureboxes (i have one ), but it seems impossible to use that technology to put a decent cam in a phone. Might be cos of the size ? The smaller you have it, the worse gets the pics... bottomline : phones are not pictureboxes, and will never be.
Dirk
Speaking of the camera i have only 1 question ( dumb ) ...how do you zoom ? Haven't found this option !
you can only zoom when you are not in max resolution (3M), change to lower and you can zoom, the zoom slider is on the left side and you can use keypad (6 & 4) to control too
Maybe i'm missing basic photo knowledge but, the bigger the resolution ,smaller the zoom ?
at least that's how the ipaq work, i have no idea about the reason but then you don't really expect it can zoom much since then lens can't really move much like a real camera anyway
keyx said:
at least that's how the ipaq work, i have no idea about the reason but then you don't really expect it can zoom much since then lens can't really move much like a real camera anyway
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
It's an electonic zoom, nothing to do with the lens. If you want to 'zoom' the software uses an alogorithm to recalculate the picture and display the 'center' part of it as larger (zoomed). Gives nice distortions too
Dirk
as I definitely won't use my camera, do you know a program that can use the led of the camera as a flash light and that works on 614C ?
I tried nuelight and torchbutton but none of them work on this device ...
Hello,
YES!, YES!, I know I'm noob....my first post yeah...OK to the question, when I take pictures using my HD2, and send them to my computer, the pictures don't like as neat and high def as the samples on the phone. I was just wondering if there is way to make it at least a bit more crisp and decent looking than the poor quality and blurness that i get now. The resolution is set to the highest..contrast normal, etc..ANY TIPS...Thank you...
get your hands on BsB Tweaks. Simple .cab install. It has a few options for 'hidden' settings for the camera and camcorder.
I'll do thanks...will that me it sharper??
Honestly I've not done a lot of comparisons, but it does add a SUPERFINE option to the camera, so that has to be worth something!
Finehood, what's the highest resolution setting you see in your camera menu? There should be a 5MP (2592x1552) setting available on there...it's on the second page of resolution options so make sure you didn't miss that.
If you don't see it there, then the BsB option jimbonics mentioned will add that in addition to the "superfine" mode. It also adds a couple of other modes you might like, so it's worth checking out. If you can't or won't use BsB, then they're available as just a regular cab too.
thanks...guys..
thank you guys....and yes I do have it in 5mp, but still the quality looks awful, but I'll be getting the bsb tweak...that sounds like it might fix my problems..any other suggestion is welcome!!!!THANK YOU
finehood said:
thank you guys....and yes I do have it in 5mp, but still the quality looks awful, but I'll be getting the bsb tweak...that sounds like it might fix my problems..any other suggestion is welcome!!!!THANK YOU
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check out these other tips too:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=7229727&postcount=2
(the last one on that list is what we've already suggested above)
thanks again...
good tips...I'll keep you guys post it if it gets better!!
Are you having a lot of noise problems ? Unfortunately that's not going to go away. If you're expecting some quality pictures like what a real camera would take you'll be quite disappointed . I've tried tweaking it myself left and right and every which way possible. I've seen some sample pictures from the EVO and even with it's 8MP cam it does not look a whole lot better.
good to know..
actually, u know what..i kind of knew that it would never be close to a regular picture cam, but with the high megapixels at least i was expecting something decent...but thank you...I did the bsb tweaks and got a bit better...the hidden tricks are all right...thanks everyone..
the fact is HD2 cam is poorer than HD's. I have both devices, HD in default (auto) settings takes very well pix, and HD2 (even after tweaks) takes puctures "ugly". The overall temperature of the shot is in grey tones domination, while HD take very realistic, closer to simple digicams. If anybody has an answers, please comment. Would be great if we will be able to take pix even just HD does.
When you take a picture and look at it from your computer is the size of the picture the same as the HD2's screen?
I'll usually just right click on the picture and send it to paint, click on image, then stretch/skew function. I'll reduce it to at least 50% / 50% and work my way down from there. That usually increases the image quality for me. I don't need a picture the size of three of my computer screens. Hope it helps.
When in doubt my friend photoshop is your friend
right...
photoshop will do the fixing for us....jiji...but like i said before i was just wondering if there was a way to make it better...like a tweak or a .cab, etc. bsb is not bad, but it doen't make the image any better in quality...but good tweak really good tweaks..
finehood said:
photoshop will do the fixing for us....jiji...but like i said before i was just wondering if there was a way to make it better...like a tweak or a .cab, etc. bsb is not bad, but it doen't make the image any better in quality...but good tweak really good tweaks..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What we have here folks is a hardware problem not a software problem. Well actually a little bit of both . All the software tweaks out there does help a bit compared to the stock camera but that's as far as your going to get. Software can only do so much and there isn't a magical software solution when you are coupled with a lousy quality camera lens. The fact is HTC has probably cheapened out the quality of the camera lens compared to earlier phones but regardless the HD2 is a phone first not a camera. Short of replacing the whole lens there's very little software can do when the hardware isn't up to par.
I've had my HD2 since June 30th and believe me this thing takes MUCH BETTER pics than my Blackberry Bold 9700 did at 3.2MP and that phone took some really nice pictures.
I think it depends on the environment your in at the time. I took a few close up pics of my Wife and kids and those images came out beautiful. I also took some scenery shots in landscape and those images came out awsome as well. I took some pics inside the Tennessee Aquarium and had mixed results. As long as the lighting was good the images came out great. In darker settings the images were not as sharp.
I do use BsB Tweeks and I also have my resolution set to 5MP. I'm not sure why your camera is producing such awful images but I'm very pleased with mine.
squire366 said:
I do use BsB Tweeks and I also have my resolution set to 5MP. I'm not sure why your camera is producing such awful images but I'm very pleased with mine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it awful? He never posted any samples of his pictures. Are you really pleased because I'm not. How good the pictures actually look to an individual are highly subjective. I would hardly consider the pictures I've taken pleasing but I'm just going to have to settle.
I think the problem here is that finehood is really picky and had high expectations. I'm assuming what he had in mind were quality pictures closer to that of a real camera.
Sounds like user error to me. Try wiping your lens before taking pics. . My HD2 takes great pics.
Pop...
Take a picture at max resolution. Then copy that picture over to your pc. View that picture at 100%. You'll see it looks like ass.
hey guys...
i was reading some of the posts, and it makes sense, believe me I never got the wild idea of a phone cam being equal or better quality than a normal cam... but even with the 5 mp and the tweaks and considering light issues or environment surrounding your pics is not even close to a decent quality that's all I'm saying, the pictures look BEAUTIFUL on your phone, really neat and crisp, once you transfer your pics to a computer and see it in full scale you'll know what I'm talking about...blurriness, blur edges, sometimes pixelete images mainly in the face, I'm happy with the phone....and all it does, but I WAS JUST WONDERING if there was a way to make it a bit better...BSB Tweaks did some adjustments...thanks for the feedback guys, I'll be posting some pics shortly..so you guys get the idea....