Digital camera

Message

Mick Smith · #1 Post by **Mick Smith** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 7:35 pm

I bought myself a digital camera today. It's nothing flash though. I've been buying too many bows to be able to afford a good one.

We're going away in a fortnight on a family holiday and I have persuaded the wife that we need to "get up to date" and buy ourselves a "modern" camera.

It's an Olympus FE-100. It's got 4 mega pixels. I paid AU$175.00 for it, on special, at a local electrical store. It's got a 2.8 optical zoom and a 4x digital zoom. It's not a compact as some of them, but it's still pretty small and lightweight. I'll be able to carry it around in my pocket. Best of all, the money didn't come from my personal money pool, it came from the family general revenue account.

Afterall we need it for the family holiday.

I'll be able to post more photos now and I'll be able to post them straightaway, no waiting for film to be developed and best of all no more fuzzy scanned images. All I've got to do now, is learn how to operate the complicated little thing.

Mick

piggy · #2 Post by **piggy** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 8:02 pm

Hey Mick hope you have managed to fit your bow in for that holiday

Mick Smith · #3 Post by **Mick Smith** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 8:20 pm

That's why I'm seriously looking around for a T/D case mate, so I can take my T/D for a holiday too.

Mick

MrRecurve · #4 Post by **MrRecurve** » Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:26 pm

Good on ya mate, you'll love it, its the best thing I ever bought!

erron · #5 Post by **erron** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:59 pm

good luck to you, Mick! Can you show us a pic of the camera?

Maybe point it at a mirror

Erron

#6 Post by **Stickbow Hunter** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:31 pm

Good one Mick!

We can now look forward to some clear photos from you now.

They are great to have and something that I would like to get some day. I borrow my son's a fair bit.

Jeff

Mick Smith · #7 Post by **Mick Smith** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Erron

I will try to show you the camera. It ain't nuthin special though.

Jeff

I hope the photos will be a bit better. I've been playing around with it today. I might try to post a photo from it here. If it comes out, the photo is one of my Chekmate Atilla 54# recurve along with some Silverwood arrows I made for it. I hope the size of the photo works out OK.

Mick

#8 Post by **Stickbow Hunter** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:38 pm

Mate, lookin better already. Looks like you did a good job on those arras as well.

Jeff

Mick Smith · #9 Post by **Mick Smith** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:54 pm

Jeff

The photos aren't as clear as I expected. They are still a bit fuzzy for some reason. Maybe when I get used to using the new camera I'll start producing better shots. They seemed to be nice and clear when I was editing them.

I was reasonably happy with those arrows mate. The splices are only done the quick and easy way, but then again they are meant to be shooting arrows, not looking at arrows. The splices serve their purpose of distinguishing which feather is the cock feather and they do this well. I was pretty happy with the stain too, not too dark and not too light. The only problem is, the Atilla doesn't like 'em. They shoot good and straight from my 60# Martin Savannah though, so obviously they were a bit overspined for the Atilla.

The Atilla has one of those rubber "Shurgrips" on the handle. They really do provide an excellent grip even with wet or sweaty hands. I like the way it looks too. It's also fitted with a pair of my homemade "Wooley Whisper" string silencers too. It is a nice bow to shoot.

Mick

#10 Post by **Stickbow Hunter** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 8:14 pm

Mick,

The bow looks good mate. You do like your short bows.

You probably just need to sharpen your photos a little with your editing software. This seems quite the norm with digital phtography.

Also keep in mind that digis are little cameras and you need to hold them steady when taking a photo or you will get motion blurr. That photo was obviously taken inside so maybe your shutter speed was too slow and caused some motion blurr.

Jeff

MaylandL · #11 Post by **MaylandL** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 11:01 pm

Nice bit of tackle there Mick. The Attila looks like a really sweet shooting bow. It must really flick those arrows out with the amount of curve on the limbs.

I think those bunnies are gonna be running scared now

Happy shooting

GrahameA · #12 Post by **GrahameA** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:34 am

Hi Mick

As Jeff said:

You probably just need to sharpen your photos a little with your editing software.

Stating the obvious, they also tend to lose clarity progressively as you compress them more. (Not really a great problem for me - I don't use my specs at the computer.) You may find you get a much better image if you compress them less at the expense of only a relatively small increase in file size.

IMHO The photos are great.

Mick Smith · #13 Post by **Mick Smith** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 2:43 pm

Mayland

Yeah mate the Atilla is a sweet shooting bow. It's nice and light to carry as well. I've just got to get some arrows that are spined at 45# for it. The arrows that I thought I could use, all shoot to the left, albeit in nice little groups.

Most times anyway.

Grahame

What you say about losing clarity when compressing photos is true. I don't understand why this is so. I would have thought that the clarity would get better as you compressed them because the detail is smaller and the pixels are pushed closer together. In my uniformed mind it doesn't make much sense, yet I can definately see what you are saying is indeed very true. My photos looked much crisper when they were on my editing page in their larger state. I tried to sharpen them with my softwear, but they ended up looking downright weird. I suppose eventually, practice makes perfect.

Mick

Buford · #14 Post by **Buford** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:14 pm

Mick,
I would wager all my worth that once you started your editing, the JPEG file format was maintained?

One thing I learned while working as a photo re-finisher is NEVER save your images as JPEG's. Once they are downloaded first thing we did was save as .TIF files.

Let me explain......... Every time you open and then save a JPEG file, you loose that little bit of picture quality. This is due to the file format slightly compressing the file to minimize the consumed space. If you are also resizing the image during your editing, the difference can be quite noticeable. TIF file format doesn't do this.

Obviously this isn't a problem if you only intend to post the pics on the net, but your reprints will suck!

My advice would be save your pics as .TIF files and any you wanna post on here, or email to fam and friends, copy the pic and do your editing on that one. that way you always have a raw file pic to fall back on if your photo-shopping goes wrong.

Buford

Mick Smith · #15 Post by **Mick Smith** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:37 pm

Buford you'd be right too. I had them in JPEG format from start to finish. I'm only a rank beginner.

Thanks for the tip mate. Next time I'll save them as TIF files and only change them into JPEG format before posting them. I had no idea this would make a difference. It explains why my pictures start of as mediocre ones then "progress" to downright substandard after being saved initially and then edited and then saved again all the while as JPEGs.

It's all new to me.

Thanks mate!!

Mick

Buford · #16 Post by **Buford** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:48 pm

I'm only a rank beginner.

Mate, don't sweat it.

Thats how we learn things.

If I had a buck for every mistake I've made, I wouldn't be workin' for a living!

Buford

GrahameA · #17 Post by **GrahameA** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:32 pm

Hi Mick

In simple terms there are two forms of compression lossless and lossy.

Both give a smaller file size.

In lossless you keep all the data by using an algorithm (mathematical "equation"). Compressed TIFF is lossless

In lossy you basically decide what you can throw away in the photo to make it smaller. JPEG is lossy. The more you compress it the more datat you throw away and the blurrier it becomes. And you cannot get the dat back.

If you change the dimensions then the file size will go down as a square function. Halve the image size the file drops to a quarter. Quarter the image size and the file drops to 1/16.

For JPEGs as a rough guide a compression of 30 on a 100 scale is reasonable for web work.

That is a very short explanation. Welcome to the world of "Digital Imaging".

(Now just wait until you start making movies.

)

Buford · #18 Post by **Buford** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 9:20 pm

GrahameA wrote:Hi Mick

In simple terms there are two forms of compression lossless and lossy.

Both give a smaller file size.

In lossless you keep all the data by using an algorithm (mathematical "equation"). Compressed TIFF is lossless

In lossy you basically decide what you can throw away in the photo to make it smaller. JPEG is lossy. The more you compress it the more datat you throw away and the blurrier it becomes. And you cannot get the dat back.

If you change the dimensions then the file size will go down as a square function. Halve the image size the file drops to a quarter. Quarter the image size and the file drops to 1/16.

For JPEGs as a rough guide a compression of 30 on a 100 scale is reasonable for web work.

That is a very short explanation. Welcome to the world of "Digital Imaging".

(Now just wait until you start making movies. )

yeah, what he said.....

Mick Smith · #19 Post by **Mick Smith** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 9:10 am

Thanks fellas, you are a wealth of information.

Obviously there is much to know and learn. And to think, I thought it was going to be easy.

It's funny you know, I was under the impression that modern technology was here to make life easier, but it is aparent that this is not the case. It opens lots of windows and opportunities, but at a cost. You have to be bloody Einstein to make it work!

Like everything else, the more you try, the more you learn, until eventually I'll know about a quarter of what I need to, to be able to do the job properly. Luckily, my personal motto is "Near enough is good enough". I might translate that into latin one day, I reckon it would sound very regal.

Mick

GrahameA · #20 Post by **GrahameA** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 11:29 am

Good Michael

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. (Anything said in Latin sounds profound.)

It's funny you know, I was under the impression that modern technology was here to make life easier, but it is aparent that this is not the case. It opens lots of windows and opportunities, but at a cost.

I don't think it so much that but rather we expect things to just work. In the case of the Digital Camera it does what it was designed to do perfectly . Takes a photo - and you can print an acceptable photo from it.

oculis tauri

Where the problems start is when we extend the uses. You have made the move from taking a simple photographs to wanting to put it on the web and electronicaly disseminate it to the world.

An even that is amazingly simple with a bit of practice. Think of all the pain we use to go through scanning images. Or think of the days when if you wanted a photo you did your own develop and print.

I spend a little bit of time playing around with digital photography and I am endlessly amazed at what I can do - and even more amazed that I can do in 10 minutes on the computer what would take me hours in the darkroom.

In 3 months all of these initial problems will just seem like distant memories.

Sorry I cannot give you the latin for, "Close enough is good enough". But my handy collection of Latin phrases did have this:

Certe, toto, sentio nos in kansate non iam adesse
You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore

Buford · #21 Post by **Buford** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:48 pm

95% of problems with modern technology are UIP...... user interface problems.

Or in other words........ things work fine till people try to use them.

oh, by the way, the other 5% are windows related. Unless you use a IMac then 100% are UIP.

#22 Post by **Stickbow Hunter** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:08 pm

oh, by the way, the other 5% are windows related. Unless you use a IMac then 100% are UIP.

I take it you must be one o them rich Mac men huh Buford?

Jeff

ole_silver · #23 Post by **ole_silver** » Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:18 pm

back to the picture on hand, your gear looks great laid out like it is, well done......

"technology.......... "

i still have kids at home so they get first go then tell me what to do..
(not where to go... )

Mick Smith · #24 Post by **Mick Smith** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:30 pm

A short life, but a merry one. This phrase might well describe the short lived career of my new digital camera.

I took it on a rugged goat hunting trip on Anzac day and took a few photos with it. There were no problems, but when I got home it refused to work. The batteries were changed with fully charged ones, but it made no difference. The only signs of life are when you turn it on, you get a couple of flashing lights at the back and the little motor tries to push out the lens at the front, but it only goes about halfway and stops.

I was able to transfer the images already in the camera into my computer OK.

I'm thinking that maybe there is some grit stuck in beside the lens barrel housing, jambing up the works. I carried the camera in it's little padded pouch in my pocket. It would have received lots of bumps. I noticed at one stage there was a fair bit of grit inside the camera bag that must have come in through my pocket opening and on into the camera bag.

What action would you suggest I take? Would the warranty still apply, if it turned out to be caused by grit? Should I just take it to a camera shop for them to open it up and have a look? Do you simply throw these little cheapish cameras away when the pack up?

It's a real nuisance as I was really enjoying having and using this little camera.

Mick

MrRecurve · #25 Post by **MrRecurve** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:41 pm

Dont throw it out mate, even if warranty doesnt cover it, im sure the repair cost wouldnt outweigh the replacement cost.

Ps get a bag with a zip!

Mick Smith · #26 Post by **Mick Smith** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:37 pm

Mr

Yes mate I should have been more careful. I've carried it in my pocket regularly over the couple of months that I've owned it, without any problems. If I can get it repaired, or if I have to buy another one, I will take much better care of it. I might even get one of those waterproof and shockproof ones because I'm not good at moddycoddling equipment.

It seems I'm becoming surrounded with fragile electronic equipment and I don't like it. I've got a GPS, a mobile phone and the digital camera (or I did have) on most major trips away. I think I prefered the good old days before they existed.

I'll get in contact with where I bought it from to see what they have to say.

Mick

#27 Post by **Stickbow Hunter** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:44 pm

Mick,

I agree that it would be well worth getting it looked at. Take it in and tell them and show them what is happening. It may be a warranty problem you don't know. Most likely you would have to send it to the manufacturer for it to be looked at.

Jeff

Buford · #28 Post by **Buford** » Thu Apr 27, 2006 10:46 pm

don't for gawd's sake say anything about grit!!! Play it dumb and see if they can sort it out. As soon as you put forward any indication of mistreatment (even if you were taking care of it), manufacturers will jump on it and not honor any warranty. At work we are service agents for a number of warranty companies and as soon as they can shift the blame away from 'manufactures fault' they will, even without an inspection.
Just take it back and say what is wrong with it, don't suggest what it could be, that way you will at least get it inspected and you haven't lied.

Mick Smith · #29 Post by **Mick Smith** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:14 pm

Thanks fellas.

I rang the store where I bought the camera and they said to bring it in and they would either exchange it or send it away for repairs. That's good advice Matt, it's true I don't know if the problem is actually grit anyway so I'll just play dumb. I'm good at that.

Mick

Mick Smith · #30 Post by **Mick Smith** » Sat May 20, 2006 12:19 pm

Well fellas, the bad news is, my little Olympus can't be fixed. It's completely cactus.

The good news is, Olympus have replaced it with a completely new one, free of charge. It's even a slightly more expensive model too.

Hows that for great service?

I will look after this one.

Mick