>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> Sony Ericsson 8.1MP C905 Discussion (Shiho)
Bookmark topic
On 2008-09-15 17:46:58, AbuBasim wrote:
On 2008-09-15 17:20:34, recl wrote:
it would have been even nicer if he posted the pics fullsize
Yes, Virgile has a Flickr pro account so why is he always uploading those thumbnails?
It's probably just a lot quicker and easier to load up smaller pics, than the massive full size photos. He reduces all of his SLR photos too, so it probably is just habit from doing that.
--
Posted: 2008-09-15 22:29:00
Edit :
Quote
amazing quality for phone camera pics...cant wait to get c905...real crisp colours and sharpness
--
Posted: 2008-09-15 22:33:26
Edit :
Quote
Something that confuses me about Fontaines pics. How is this possible?
Shutter Speed
is Exposure Time. How can they be different? More to the point, why is shutter speed even listed? I've never seen an Exif file list Shutter Speed as well as Exposure Time. Very odd.
Then again,
IS0-938 seems very strange too!
Hopefully this is a software glitche...
_________________
I can't think of anything to write here...
[ This Message was edited by: marty mcfly on 2008-09-15 22:56 ]
--
Posted: 2008-09-15 23:02:21
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-09-15 23:02:21, marty mcfly wrote:
I've never seen an Exif file list Shutter Speed as well as Exposure Time. Very odd.
have you ever seen EXIF from SO905iCS...?
also in different value
Also exist on digital camera (same value)
[ This Message was edited by: jigonx on 2008-09-16 04:40 ]
--
Posted: 2008-09-16 05:30:36
Edit :
Quote
so does that mean those pics are fake:-? ??
--
Posted: 2008-09-16 06:48:37
Edit :
Quote
Fake? No..
Edited? Yes. At least it has been resized to 800x600. Some edited photos can suffer corrupted EXIF.
Other photos by Virgile doesn't has strange EXIF like that...
Hiron
--
Posted: 2008-09-16 07:20:48
Edit :
Quote
Maybe its because they havn't perfected the exif yet cause its not the final firmware
--
Posted: 2008-09-16 09:21:05
Edit :
Quote
[quote]
On 2008-09-16 07:20:48, Hiron wrote:
Some edited photos can suffer corrupted EXIF.
Other photos by Virgile doesn't has strange EXIF like that...
That's not exactly true. Editing photos can cause them to lose EXIF entries altogether, but it wouldn't change individual values like that.
On 2008-09-16 05:30:36, jigonx wrote:
have you ever seen EXIF from SO905iCS...?
also in different value
Also exist on digital camera (same value)
This suggests it's a problem within Sony Ericsson firmware then. As you pointed out, the Shutter Speed and Exposure Time should be the same value. They are one and the same thing.
I don't think they are fake at all, but the EXIF information is a load of rubbish. Hopefully that will be sorted.
_________________
I can't think of anything to write here...
[ This Message was edited by: marty mcfly on 2008-09-16 09:02 ]
--
Posted: 2008-09-16 09:59:49
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-09-12 08:45:00, marty mcfly wrote:
If those are natural colours for the landscape, either its taken on another planet, or you always wear blue tinted sunglasses! Plus, this picture looks very strange. I'm sure it's a photo of a photo. The actual picture seems to be edited. The leaves don't look natural against the background, like it's superimposed. Not the best example of a C905 photo.
in hindsight I can see it does have a blue hue but it's not serious tbh. I think the photshop over corrects the colour (makes the sand more yellow than it is). Those flowers are a blue colour, so it looks a bit unatural, but that might be just they way they are.
But I agree it still has too much of a blue hue. My personal view about colour is that it's easy to correct. What's more important is how clear and detailed an image is because this can't be corrected for.
--
Posted: 2008-09-16 14:33:04
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-09-16 14:33:04, max_wedge wrote:
On 2008-09-12 08:45:00, marty mcfly wrote:
If those are natural colours for the landscape, either its taken on another planet, or you always wear blue tinted sunglasses! Plus, this picture looks very strange. I'm sure it's a photo of a photo. The actual picture seems to be edited. The leaves don't look natural against the background, like it's superimposed. Not the best example of a C905 photo.
in hindsight I can see it does have a blue hue but it's not serious tbh. I think the photshop over corrects the colour (makes the sand more yellow than it is). Those flowers are a blue colour, so it looks a bit unatural, but that might be just they way they are.
But I agree it still has too much of a blue hue. My personal view about colour is that it's easy to correct. What's more important is how clear and detailed an image is because this can't be corrected for.
I added a lot of saturation to show the blue tint up. But as for correcting colour, it should be perfect from the handset. You shouldn't have to correct anything afterwards, it takes away the point of a camera.
However, this all seems to have been corrected with the pictures posted from Virgile Fontaine.
--
Posted: 2008-09-16 15:08:11
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
