Sony’s DSC-P93 sucks

UPDATE: Maybe I was wrong. See the bot­tom of this arti­cle for more.

The sen­sor on this must be an absolute piece of trash. It hasn’t even got the excuse of a slowly dying sen­sor due to a man­u­fac­tur­ing defect/humidity… it’s just really poor quality.

One image highlighting its posterization-type effects

The above image has just been scaled, and care­fully com­pressed so as not to exac­er­bate the prob­lem (in actual fact, JPEG com­pres­sion arti­facts reduce the sever­ity of it). It looks as though it’s had a pos­ter­ize fil­ter applied to it (reduc­ing the num­ber of colours in the palette, sim­i­lar to what indexed GIF pho­tos look like), but it hasn’t. That’s straight out of the cam­era… so far as I can tell, no other soft­ware has touched it.

Maybe it just looks worse to me than it is because I’ve got three sets of images here, the other two of which come from a Canon EOS-300D — or Dig­i­tal Rebel in US-speak — (or maybe a pair of them, judg­ing from time delay between shots, but last I heard they were junky con­sumer ver­sions of the EOS-10D with plas­tic cas­ing, and “spe­cial” lens options, so why any­one would buy two of them is beyond me). I don’t know, I was just pretty appalled this was com­ing straight of a cam­era — ANY cam­era, regard­less as to the brand. It’s not over­ex­posed, or blurred, or grainy (well, it is, but you can’t see it par­tic­u­larly well in the scaled ver­sion and that’s not what I’m com­plain­ing about — I under­stand low-light does that to pho­tos), it’s just really bad colour. Inci­den­tally, it was shot as a JPEG. So, it’s not like I or any­one else has screwed up RAW pro­cess­ing — the cam­era has done that for us.

Oh, and inci­den­tally, what’s with 3:2 ratios? I think it’s nicer than 4:3, but it bugged me to look shots from the Canon before I fig­ured out what was going on!

Update: Per­haps they have been processed a lit­tle. One or two of the Rebel’s pho­tos are exhibit­ing sim­i­lar qual­i­ties, so that leads me to believe some­one was being a tool with sat­u­ra­tion in Pho­to­shop or the like. And unhelp­fully left the EXIF data intact so I thought it was unchanged. :-( I guess I’m often guilty of much the same thing with the GIMP, but oh well. Doesn’t hurt to be wrong once in a while!

Another image effects, this time from Rebel

# by Josh on October 20th, 2005 Tags: , , ,
| 2 Comments »

More Moire on a Gateway EV500 monitor

We picked up a second-hand Gate­way com­puter around the begin­ning of the year (it’s great build qual­ity, and uses less than 90W of power… but if any of the com­po­nents in it died we might be a bit screwed! Mind you, at least it has plenty of PCI slots, unlike some.), along with its orig­i­nal mon­i­tor, a 15″ Gate­way EV500.

I’m pretty sure they were rebadg­ing Sony mon­i­tors even when this thing was made, so it’s prob­a­ble there’s another model num­ber that goes with it, but per­haps not. Basi­cally, I used it because it went with the com­puter and, at that time, we didn’t have any other spare mon­i­tors of any decent quality.

This screen is okay in terms of resolutions/refresh rate sup­port (it does 1024x768 at 85Hz, which is very good for a cheap ven­dor from the late 90s — and yes, it was cheap — this is a Celeron 400MHz sys­tem, though we’ve pumped up the RAM from prob­a­bly 64MB or (opti­misti­cally) 128MB to 256MB to make it usable with XP. It is, how­ever, rather blurry.

Or, was. We acquired it just as we moved into this house, so I didn’t really have a lot of time to spend just set­ting it up prop­erly… I was try­ing to get, you know, four other com­put­ers and the net­work setup, whilst work­ing out how to con­fig­ure the phone sys­tem… oh, yeah, and I had to move into my bed­room at some point, too (in actual fact I still haven’t unpacked all the boxes… there is one or two remain­ing but I know what’s in them and they’re being stored in the bot­tom of a wardrobe, so that’s okay!)… basi­cally I threw it on the desk and plugged it in, for­mat­ted and installed XP, made some triv­ial admin­is­tra­tive soft­ware changes (prob­a­bly via RDC because hot desk­ing is, like, so much eas­ier than turn­ing around and using another KVM setup!), and promptly for­got about it.

So today I actu­ally had to use it for a bit and its blur­ri­ness irri­tated me enough to bother doing some­thing about it. It’s got one of those doors that cov­ers con­trols and pops open to reveal a rotary switch that dou­bles as a but­ton, so I did that see­ing if there was any­thing I could do to fix it in there. Alas, no soft­ware focus util­i­ties to be found (must poke a screw­driver in the back of it some­time), though, impor­tantly, there are both Ver­ti­cal and Hor­i­zon­tal Moire adjust­ments avail­able under the More option from the core menu. This mon­i­tor had a fairly sig­nif­i­cant moire prob­lem (I’m not sure if I’m using that term cor­rectly, though I know the prob­lem was with that), so play­ing with these set­tings for a bit made its lots more pleas­ant to use.

Admit­tedly, its focus towards the edges drops off fairly sig­nif­i­cantly, but that could be an unavoid­able lim­i­ta­tion of the device (that is, it’s a curved CRT dis­play… so the focal length phys­i­cally does change fairly significantly).

# by Josh on October 6th, 2005 Tags: , , ,
| 1 Comment »

Audio recording program for Windows

Aside from Audac­ity, does any­one know of a good (free) audio record­ing pro­gram for Win­dows (XPish… Media Cen­ter Edi­tion, actu­ally)? Only needs to do a sin­gle track, but I’m just not a huge fan of Audacity’s inter­face, and was mostly just curi­ous to see what else was out there.

And no, I haven’t aban­doned my Ubuntu behe­moth, it’s just that we’ve got a baby Shut­tle com­puter down­stairs that has much bet­ter qual­ity audio stuff going for it. The mic itself is slightly-but-not-much-better-than-the-average-PC-mic (it’s a now-discontinued Andrea prod­uct), which means you actu­ally can hear the dif­fer­ence in line noise. Just. Well, okay, more than just, it’s prob­a­bly the best cheap/free head­set mic I’ve ever used, but that still prob­a­bly isn’t say­ing huge amounts. Bah, what­ever… the point is, what­ever the sound­card I’ve got in my day-to-day com­puter (some C-Media thing) is crap and ridicu­lously noisy, and the Shuttle’s AC’97 is loads bet­ter (because it’s prob­a­bly about five years more recent than the sound card in here, and also because its out­put is dig­i­tal going to some Sony receiver that does things nicely enough. At least part of the prob­lem with this PC is that its out­put is lousy.)

So yeah. I’m using XP Media Cen­ter Edi­tion (I was plan­ning on post­ing pho­tos of the few-month-old box some­time, I promise! It just slipped past me/I couldn’t be bothered/It was down­stairs and I live at the other end of the house/You’ve all prob­a­bly seen these things before and it’s not really that exciting/It’s Dad’s toy not mine and I’m still vaguely con­vinced he shouldn’t have got it/Insert myr­iad other rea­sons for not blog­ging here.), and want to know what peo­ple who haven’t got money to spend on soft­ware they rarely use are using for occa­sional audio recording.

Slightly-crazy idea: Is Win­dows Movie Maker any good for record­ing audio? I recall you can use a com­men­tary track on that… I’m think­ing it’d be pos­si­ble just to throw in a blank screen and extend it for how­ever long I needed to record for. I’m a fan of not hav­ing to install more soft­ware, espe­cially on some­thing retarded and intended purely for… watch­ing TV (hah!) and doing other such crap. So yeah. Com­ments? Please? For once?

Yeah, I know when­ever I ask for com­ments I seem to get less than usual on posts… meh :P Fail­ing feed­back, I’ll give Movie Maker a go and if it’s too hor­ri­ble then Audac­ity it is.

# by Josh on September 29th, 2005 Tags: , , ,
| 3 Comments »

Our new-old TV

We’ve finally bought a TV capa­ble of hav­ing RCA cables plugged directly into it! Sure, it’s sec­ond hand, con­ven­tional (i.e. not flat) CRT and a Sanyo, but it’s 51cm and means we don’t need to use a 19″ BenQ LCD bizarrely wired directly to our DVD player which has a VGA out­put (nearly exactly half the LCD’s native res­o­lu­tion, which is handy, but it’s a pain to lug from the office to the liv­ing room every time we wanna watch a DVD!).

So that’s excit­ing. I’d post pic­tures, but just imag­ine any generic curvy CRT TV and you’ve got the right idea. ;) It wasn’t really worth the time it’d take to find the cam­era, take a photo, come upstairs, upload photo, resize photo, login and upload via FTP, and then fig­ure out the path to the file for inclu­sion in this post!

It also has won­der­ful won­der­ful mono sound, but that’s okay, because we’ve got a nice Sony sys­tem hooked up for that… at least the audio side of things is pretty good qual­ity, even if the vision is func­tional but far from excel­lent (Infi­nitely bet­ter than the 20-or-30-something year old set we used to use as the main TV, though!)…

Later: As a direct result of the won­ders of pro­cras­ti­na­tion, I ven­tured down­stairs with a cam­era and took a photo of a per­fectly bor­ing TV.

A perfectly boring TV.

There you go.

# by Josh on March 1st, 2005 Tags: , , , , ,
| 1 Comment »

Last day at FMO

Fin­ished up there today, and decided I’d go for another trip with Peter’s beeeeeeeaaaaaaau­ti­ful Sony DSC-P10 again.  This time around they’re not as good, because I played with the zoom a bit too much, and lack suf­fi­cient motor con­trol to stop myself from shaking(no tri­pod + zoom = blur, hehe)!

I went for a wan­der (okay, a brisk wan­der… more of a gal­lop ;) ) through Vic­to­ria Park at lunchtime today, snap­ping shots of gar­dens, and other things.  The rea­son?  Hmm.  Well.  I wanted to play with the cam­era, for one.  And some of the pho­tos are for a friend.  They’re some­thing of a per­son­i­fi­ca­tion, in response to a self-portrait…

Still, despite my shak­i­ness and inabil­ity to con­trol that beau­ti­ful cam­era, there are some decent shots in this lot (acces­si­ble at my Gallery page when­ever my com­puter is on — direct link to album http://nicktangents.is-a-geek.com/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=vicpark23july04), or so I’d hope…

I’ve made the third image in the gallery my wall­pa­per, that’s prob­a­bly my favorite of the lot… let me know what you think of them, if you think any­thing of them at all.

# by Josh on July 23rd, 2004 Tags: , ,
| No Comments »

Photography et al.

On what is meant to be a week work­ing in an IT envi­ron­ment, I spent the day climb­ing on the roofs of some of the old­est build­ings in Aus­tralia (com­pleted 1862).  And, bet­ter still, I was equipped with an incred­bily sexy Sony DSC-P10 dig­i­tal cam­era whilst doing so.

Of course, this meant I had to get Gallery up and run­ning to share it all with the world, so check out http://nicktangents.is-a-geek.com/gallery/ for the images (server run­ning on my desk­top, so acces­si­ble only when my PC is turned on).  What you see there was the result of a ~1 and a half hour trip, and an FTP upload to my home PC of an 80MB ZIP file.  Hehehe.  Not all of the images were rel­e­vant, there were orig­i­nally 66.  I removed the more bor­ing ones of scaf­fold­ing from view (the scaf­fold­ing shots were my jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for the trip).

They let me onto the roof of the Quad­ran­gle build­ing, the Mungo Mac­Cal­lum build­ing, and the Bell Tower (that last one is like… “no-one goes here” ter­ri­tory.  Mind you, not too many tourists go on roofs, but you get the idea.) — hence my desire for exten­sive photo-evidence of my trip ;)  Hehe.  It was 66 pho­tos, the album con­tains 38 (the rest were painters and scaf­fold­ing and the odd tree).

So that was INCREDIBLY cool.  For­tu­nately they’re sen­si­ble about safety over there, cau­tious with­out being pro­hib­i­tively so… only “require­ment” which they had was my use of a hard­hat in a des­ig­nated area being ren­o­vated (Old Teach­ers’ Col­lege).  All roof-climbing was basi­cally “don’t do any­thing stu­pid like go too near the edge”, which was incred­i­bly use­ful, espe­cially con­sid­er­ing I was try­ing to take pho­tographs… bar­ri­ers and rails, etc. would have been seri­ously irritating!

In other excit­ing news, I scored a Pen­tium 3 – 866 today, as well as (what I think is) a TNT-2 and a Socket 370 mobo to match the Pen­tium 3 (onboard sound, too).  Oh yeah, and also picked up a 10/100 net­work card AND an incred­i­bly use­ful front-USB 5 1/4″ bay plate.  Hooray for a waste­ful soci­ety, reap the ben­e­fits!  Yeah!!!  Hehehe.  In between set­ting up Gallery and enter­ing 38 descrip­tions, as well as mis­cel­lanous other things, I haven’t yet had time to test the hard­ware.  It will hap­pen!  I’ll make it happen!

I promise as soon as I have that run­ning, updates shall be posted…

Mmm. 3CCD goodness.

I was @swylie’s today, doing var­i­ous stuff, and saw an incred­i­bly cool cam­era.  Gim­micky in parts, but still unde­ni­ably func­tional and gen­er­ally cool.  I *think* it was a Sony DCR-TRV950 MiniDV cam, but wasn’t tak­ing notes… if you read this, Steve, feel free to correct ;)

The image qual­ity was drool-worthy (3CCD’s do that), with a full colour(!) eye­piece, as well as an enor­mous flip-out screen (if the cam­era is the TRV950, then it’s offi­cially 3.5″ — bloody huge, com­pared to all other hand­held cam­era screens I’ve seen, at any rate) which is touch sen­si­tive and comes com­plete with sty­lus!!  It was kind of scary, though — I kept think­ing I was going to poke a hole in the screen… was the only un-cool thing about the whole experience.

As for the gim­micks?  Hmm.  Blue­tooth.  Need I say more?  No?  Thankyou.  Net­work stream­ing over Blue­tooth is bla­tantly ridicu­lous, espe­cially on what is meant to be a pro­sumer class cam­era.  That said, I wouldn’t mind see­ing how it worked, just as a once off.  I can’t see it being great qual­ity, see­ing the through­put of Blue­tooth is appar­ently less than 750Kbps, as opposed to the enour­mous powah of Firewire (or i.Link, as Sony insists on call­ing it) at 400Mbps, but still… it’d make for a cool tech demo.

Long story short?  I want one…

# by Josh on June 14th, 2004 Tags: , ,
| No Comments »