Prev: SD/SDHC and Micro SD w/Adapter Performance vs SDHC card
Next: -> Red color and JPG???
From: RichA on 25 Mar 2010 20:16
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/03/25/cnet.mobile.phone.cameras/index.html
From: Ray Fischer on 25 Mar 2010 22:04
RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I give you a 96%

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: stephe_k on 25 Mar 2010 22:10
RichA wrote:
> http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/03/25/cnet.mobile.phone.cameras/index.html


"The Google Nexus One's 5-megapixel camera has 56 percent more pixels
than the iPhone 3GS's 3.2 megapixels, but it's clear the camera isn't 56
percent better."

Maybe they see they need to KILL the MP race in cell phones and actually
rate the image quality instead? Sounds like a great idea.

Stephanie
From: Savageduck on 25 Mar 2010 22:23
On 2010-03-25 17:16:25 -0700, RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> said:

> http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/03/25/cnet.mobile.phone.cameras/index.html

The stupid thing about all this is, are you buying a camera, or a
phone, or a handheld computer? These are still all about selling data
plans, not picture quality.

My Samsung Omnia has a 5MP camera and does a fair job in an "I don't
have my camera with me, where is my phone?" moment. The video isn't too
bad for a phone, but it is still a phone not a replacement for a P&S,
or DSLR. Though for many, a phone will be their only camera, and those
folks will be happy just to have some sort of image.

....and I can get e-mail & browse just fine on the Omnia via Verizon 3G.
(AT&T, therefore iPhone, is a no signal, non-starter around my place.)

--
Regards,

Savageduck

From: Chris Malcolm on 26 Mar 2010 05:43
In rec.photo.digital stephe_k(a)yahoo.com <stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> RichA wrote:

>> http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/03/25/cnet.mobile.phone.cameras/index.html

> "The Google Nexus One's 5-megapixel camera has 56 percent more pixels
> than the iPhone 3GS's 3.2 megapixels, but it's clear the camera isn't 56
> percent better."

Of course not. Even if it achieved the full measure of improvement 56%
extra pixels could theoretically provide, people would be unlikely to
think the 25% extra resolution meant 25% extra, since our eyes and
brains tend to use logarithmic scales in comparing things. So basic
perceptual psychology would suggest that people would think that
something like a 10% improvement.

And if nothing else in the image improved apart from resolution then
that would have to be scaled down appropriately.

> Maybe they see they need to KILL the MP race in cell phones and actually
> rate the image quality instead? Sounds like a great idea.

A big step in the right direction would just be learning the basic
perceptual arithmetic of how image pixel numbers are related to
subjective scalings of resolution.

But do you think the marketing men would allow even that? :-)

--
Chris Malcolm
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: SD/SDHC and Micro SD w/Adapter Performance vs SDHC card
Next: -> Red color and JPG???