Active Topics
-
Porting apps to Leste (32)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 4 days, 14 hrs ago -
[ANNOUNCE] CSSU-thumb thread - stable Thumb2 on N900 (2,264)
to Maemo 5 / Fremantle by panjgoori - 6 days, 8 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2010-04-27
, 22:32
|
|
Posts: 1,455 |
Thanked: 3,309 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Rochester, NY
|
#12
|
I agree that the better idea is to buy a off the shelf camera.
However, from the Nokia service manual it clearly shows the camera is a single-chip device. It's a nice square chip package that fits into a socket on the motherboard. That said, I'm sure the chip manufacturer makes other chips with the same foot print and pinout that one could pop in and replace the default with. That said, this may also be the best module for this chip footprint, and/or with the lens format. (eg To go above 5mp you may need a different socket.)
Even if you could find a hardware compatible chip with a higher resolution and lens system, there's no guarantee that the software in the phone could handle the new chip. Most of the chips also come with a rather custom driver, and/or chip-specific settings profile. I work with embedded CCD devices as part of my job and can tell you even the same controller capable of using alternate CCD chips needs to be reconfigured for each CCD, even those put out by the same manufacturer.
So, is it possible? For an engineer at Nokia, with access to the source and the config files, probably. But for most anyone else, probably not. As I said, I work with this type of equipment every day, and even I wouldn't think of trying this on my device.
However, from the Nokia service manual it clearly shows the camera is a single-chip device. It's a nice square chip package that fits into a socket on the motherboard. That said, I'm sure the chip manufacturer makes other chips with the same foot print and pinout that one could pop in and replace the default with. That said, this may also be the best module for this chip footprint, and/or with the lens format. (eg To go above 5mp you may need a different socket.)
Even if you could find a hardware compatible chip with a higher resolution and lens system, there's no guarantee that the software in the phone could handle the new chip. Most of the chips also come with a rather custom driver, and/or chip-specific settings profile. I work with embedded CCD devices as part of my job and can tell you even the same controller capable of using alternate CCD chips needs to be reconfigured for each CCD, even those put out by the same manufacturer.
So, is it possible? For an engineer at Nokia, with access to the source and the config files, probably. But for most anyone else, probably not. As I said, I work with this type of equipment every day, and even I wouldn't think of trying this on my device.
|
|
2010-04-27
, 23:03
|
|
Posts: 27 |
Thanked: 7 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#13
|
oh guys^^ i was only thinkin... but it would be cool, if there would be smartphones like computers, where you can change components, like ram 
like CPU like ehm screen xD haha. So you have an individual smartphone - but believe me in the future this will be possible and reality. I postet that when i saw the N8, i thougt: no :O 12 Megapixels? but the most thing, wondered me, was the multitouch and 720p video (because I need a good vide cam at the moment^^). But the design and the OS is **** - there is nothing to like. Only the Video and Camera funktion is good.
But yeah, like your sayin - a 100€ digicam is doing it also well, even better.
like CPU like ehm screen xD haha. So you have an individual smartphone - but believe me in the future this will be possible and reality. I postet that when i saw the N8, i thougt: no :O 12 Megapixels? but the most thing, wondered me, was the multitouch and 720p video (because I need a good vide cam at the moment^^). But the design and the OS is **** - there is nothing to like. Only the Video and Camera funktion is good. But yeah, like your sayin - a 100€ digicam is doing it also well, even better.
|
|
2010-04-28
, 01:02
|
|
Posts: 162 |
Thanked: 24 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Essex, UK
|
#14
|
Thanks woody14619, that's along the lines of what i was thinking.
I was just wondering if the hardware is compatable, i'll check out if it fits once i have a reason to open my n900 but i'm not powering it on if it does.
I was just wondering if the hardware is compatable, i'll check out if it fits once i have a reason to open my n900 but i'm not powering it on if it does.
__________________
"But when you’re living on the bleeding edge, you should not be surprised when you do, in fact, bleed."
"But when you’re living on the bleeding edge, you should not be surprised when you do, in fact, bleed."
|
|
2010-04-28
, 05:02
|
|
Posts: 336 |
Thanked: 610 times |
Joined on Apr 2008
@ France
|
#15
|
Originally Posted by ndi
Except that the crapiest 35mm film still contains more MTF-measured lines than 1080p. By definition, 1080p only has 1080 MTF lines, whereas crappy 35mm has around 1400. High end camera, properly lit set and good glass will result in nearly double that amount, so roughly 3 times as much detail as Full HD.
Pros do it too. I've got HD BD editions of movies so old the cover was yellow. Marketing.
An excellent study also defines that most theatres will show movies that have been copied a number of times (as is the case for most movies) will lose quite a lot of detail. The worst 10% of those of those copies register at between 1000 and 1400 lines, so let's say equivalent to HD. That's 90% way above HD quality.
Though, that is only 1080p HD. There are now digital cameras that will record at 14 or even 28000 lines of resolution.
In other words: Please don't speak poorly of 35mm film. It may not be as practical, cheap and reliable as digital, but it was a lot superior to anything you might believe.
Oh, and obligatory XKCD.
 |
|
2010-04-28
, 09:19
|
|
Posts: 3,159 |
Thanked: 2,023 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
@ Finland
|
#16
|
Originally Posted by necoicould
what do you do with the megapixels. I have camera with 4 megapixels and it beats n900's camera million times a second...
Hey made a brainstorming at myself, and thought if it would be possible to change the 5MP Camera with anouther camera lens, which has more megapixels ... ??
(e: actually about 6,9 frames per second if I am being realistic)
__________________
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
Last edited by ossipena; 2010-04-28 at 09:25.
|
|
2010-04-28
, 09:21
|
|
Posts: 3,159 |
Thanked: 2,023 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
@ Finland
|
#17
|
Originally Posted by CrashandDie
yes it is interesting to notice that 35mm movie film (smaller btw than 35mm normal still film) hasn't shown its grain at home until FullHD came
Except that the crapiest 35mm film still contains more MTF-measured lines than 1080p. By definition, 1080p only has 1080 MTF lines, whereas crappy 35mm has around 1400. High end camera, properly lit set and good glass will result in nearly double that amount, so roughly 3 times as much detail as Full HD.
An excellent study also defines that most theatres will show movies that have been copied a number of times (as is the case for most movies) will lose quite a lot of detail. The worst 10% of those of those copies register at between 1000 and 1400 lines, so let's say equivalent to HD. That's 90% way above HD quality.
Though, that is only 1080p HD. There are now digital cameras that will record at 14 or even 28000 lines of resolution.
In other words: Please don't speak poorly of 35mm film. It may not be as practical, cheap and reliable as digital, but it was a lot superior to anything you might believe.
Oh, and obligatory XKCD.
__________________
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
|
|
2010-04-28
, 09:24
|
|
Posts: 41 |
Thanked: 7 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
|
#18
|
Cant wait for the day and age where movies are streamed to our eyes, maximum resoultion.
And you can watch one while you sleep
Im gonna go ahead and patent this before steve jobs does..
And you can watch one while you sleep
Im gonna go ahead and patent this before steve jobs does..
 |
|
2010-04-28
, 15:51
|
|
Posts: 2,050 |
Thanked: 1,425 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Bucharest
|
#19
|
Originally Posted by CrashandDie
Didn't stab 35 mm, as I, as an amateur photographer and owner of a nice figure invested in equipment have the correct amount of respect for film and full frame sensors.
In other words: Please don't speak poorly of 35mm film. It may not be as practical, cheap and reliable as digital, but it was a lot superior to anything you might believe.
Oh, and obligatory XKCD.
What I was bashing is 70 years old celluloid, already re-projected, through age-old optics, and that now has the resolution of a photograph printed on paper. Also, the "film effect" they use to disguise the errors degrade the thing even more. We call it Gauss noise here.
One should not sell this abomination as "Full HD 1080p". What they should sell it as is "HD remastered" or "Upscaled" whatever.
On the same note, I believe that 99% of BDs today in commercial circulations should not have the full HD badge. Damn you megapixel misconception, unless each pixel contains information it's not full HD. Right now, only a few movies are true HD. Barring thise, you only get the real deal from animation encoded in a lot of gigs and directly-rendered PC games.
End rant.
__________________
N900 dead and Nokia no longer replaces them. Thanks for all the fish.
Keep the forums clean: use "Thanks" button instead of the thank you post.
N900 dead and Nokia no longer replaces them. Thanks for all the fish.
Keep the forums clean: use "Thanks" button instead of the thank you post.
Temporary signature: Real signature removed for cleaning.
Don't forget the thanks button if I helped you