people who have used CHDK
H.S.
Hello,
I was wondering what is the experience of people who have used CHDK
(http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ). In your view, does the increased
access to camera hardware and other features worthwhile the effort to
get it working in a camera? Any stories to tell?
Thanks.
PS: People who have never used it need not reply. I hope this will keep
the flame wars and dolt fanatics away.
--
Please remove all caps,if any, from my email address to get the correct
one. Apologies for the inconvenience but this is to reduce spam.
Pete D
"H.S." <hAs.sa...@gTHEmail.com> wrote in message
news:a3654$491dc711$cef8af8d$80...@TEKSAVVY.COM-Free...
I have not used it as I have no suitable cameras but would love to see some
of the photos and the methods used. Sadly not many post any shots, actually
I can recall only one picture of that bird coming out of a burrow or what
ever it was and that was only a very small file.
Cheers.
Pete
SMS
> Hello,
>
> I was wondering what is the experience of people who have used CHDK
> (http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ). In your view, does the increased
> access to camera hardware and other features worthwhile the effort to
> get it working in a camera? Any stories to tell?
>
> Thanks.
>
> PS: People who have never used it need not reply. I hope this will keep
> the flame wars and dolt fanatics away.
I have it installed. on a Canon SD series. There's a learning curve to
it, but it is pretty useful, especially the histograms, but little
things like the battery meter as well.
Some of the features are good in theory but not all that useful on a
P&S. For example, bracketing is great on an SLR where the shutter fires
very rapidly, but not all that useful on a P&S with the long delays.
It's kind of a pain that you have to load it every time you turn on the
camera. There's an auto-load feature, but it doesn't work on larger SD
cards (>4GB) which I use as the 6GB and 8GB SDHC cards have gotten so
cheap. So every time you turn on your camera you have to load it, and
it's a specific procedure (start the camera in playback mode, then
upgrade the firmware)
Does it make a difference in the quality of your photographs? Yes, in
some cases, if you take time to learn how to use it.
There's very little effort to "get it working" in the camera, you
basically put three files onto the memory card. I think it took me about
three minutes to get it working. The effort is in learning how to use
all the features. So I encourage you to at least try it. Print the users
guide out so you can take it with you while you're learning the program.
Very impressive that people put so much effort into this, including the
good documentation.
However a word of warning! While CHDK adds a lot of D-SLR like features
to a P&S, don't expect it to suddenly turn your P&S into a D-SLR! AF
speed, DOF, dynamic range, and noise aren't fixable in software!
SMS
> It's kind of a pain that you have to load it every time you turn on the
> camera. There's an auto-load feature, but it doesn't work on larger SD
> cards (>4GB) which I use as the 6GB and 8GB SDHC cards have gotten so
> cheap. So every time you turn on your camera you have to load it, and
> it's a specific procedure (start the camera in playback mode, then
> upgrade the firmware)
Also, if you end up liking it, remember to copy the three files onto all
of the memory cards you use with that camera, and don't use those cards
with other cameras.
PhilHarrington
>H.S. wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I was wondering what is the experience of people who have used CHDK
>> (http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ). In your view, does the increased
>> access to camera hardware and other features worthwhile the effort to
>> get it working in a camera? Any stories to tell?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> PS: People who have never used it need not reply. I hope this will keep
>> the flame wars and dolt fanatics away.
>
>I have it installed. on a Canon SD series. There's a learning curve to
>it, but it is pretty useful, especially the histograms, but little
>things like the battery meter as well.
>
>Some of the features are good in theory but not all that useful on a
>P&S. For example, bracketing is great on an SLR where the shutter fires
>very rapidly, but not all that useful on a P&S with the long delays.
>
Then learn how to buy better cameras that are supported by CHDK. There are no
other cameras in the world that do better bracketing. As many frames as you
want, for as many EV steps for each as you want, or for focus bracketing as many
focus-steps as you want (with 1mm to 1 meter increments, up to 64 meters from
zero mm). You can even do ISO bracketing and aperture bracketing if that fits
your needs. Always in 3 user-selectable flavors each, +EV, -EV, or +/-EV steps.
(focus bracketing in those flavors too)
If bracketing is important to you than select a CHDK capable camera that does
the highest burst rates that fit your needs. That's the only limit (a mfg.
constraint).
>It's kind of a pain that you have to load it every time you turn on the
>camera. There's an auto-load feature, but it doesn't work on larger SD
>cards (>4GB) which I use as the 6GB and 8GB SDHC cards have gotten so
>cheap. So every time you turn on your camera you have to load it, and
>it's a specific procedure (start the camera in playback mode, then
>upgrade the firmware)
I guess you're one of those poor unfortunate souls that doesn't know how to use
the dual-partition feature to make CHDK auto-booting on any SD card size.
However, some people prefer the manual-loading of CHDK and only load it when
they need all its advanced features and alignment/cropping grids, histograms,
scripts, and other EVF/LCD overlays.
>
>Does it make a difference in the quality of your photographs? Yes, in
>some cases, if you take time to learn how to use it.
>
This will always be YOUR biggest drawback in life, "learning", not just about
CHDK.
>There's very little effort to "get it working" in the camera, you
>basically put three files onto the memory card. I think it took me about
>three minutes to get it working. The effort is in learning how to use
>all the features. So I encourage you to at least try it. Print the users
>guide out so you can take it with you while you're learning the program.
>
You really only need 1 file, but I'll not bother going into that.
The "Downloadable PDF User's Guide" is scant. And, unfortunately, the volunteer
author of that PDF file didn't have complete comprehension on how to use CHDK
(being a newbie to CHDK when he thought he'd try to help out the collective
effort), so he misrepresented many features of CHDK. He's been told of this but
he's never made much effort to correct his missing information and occasional
misinformation.
You really need to read the Wiki pages to get all the information that you need
in how to run it.
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK_firmware_usage
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK_firmware_usage/AllBest
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK/MoreBest
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Grids
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/UBASIC
Those being the top five pages that should most adequately cover the brunt of
the features of CHDK. The latest releases of CHDK include all those previous
features.
>Very impressive that people put so much effort into this, including the
>good documentation.
>
>However a word of warning! While CHDK adds a lot of D-SLR like features
>to a P&S, don't expect it to suddenly turn your P&S into a D-SLR! AF
>speed, DOF, dynamic range, and noise aren't fixable in software!
Of course it'll never turn a P&S into a DSLR. It turns a P&S camera into
something far superior than any DSLR that has ever existed or will ever exist.
If your photography skill and creativity is being limited by auto-focus speed,
digital dynamic range, not knowing enough about optics to increase DOF on any
camera, etc., you need to go back to "Snap-Shooters' 101" class.
To the OP: I would be more than willing to tell you of CHDK's vast benefits, but
I thought it would be more interesting to sit back and hear unbiased opinions
from others that have used it. Occasionally correcting the grossly blatant
misinformation of DSLR-bias resident-trolls like SMS (it can be an entertaining
pastime).
Just for the record: as to the usefulness of CHDK, I won't ever buy another
camera that isn't CHDK compatible. It takes digital cameras to such a vastly
greater level of improvement that it's not even an option anymore. This is the
first time in the history of photography where cameras' capabilities are being
designed by the needs of photographers, not greedy bean-counting manufacturers.
If CHDK doesn't exist on my camera there's not a lot of reason to hold that
camera, unless it's the only one that I have available at the time. (BTW: They
just found a way to save RAW sensor data directly into DNG files, so the
non-standard RAW from these cameras will be instantly compatible with all
editors. Should be available shortly in latest builds.)
Unless some new camera can duplicate all the features that CHDK has to offer
there's just no reason to buy a new one. All DSLRs and other P&Ss included.
If you want to find photos taken with the advanced capabilities of CHDK, search
the Flickr groups. There are whole Flickr forums dedicated just to CHDK, many
fans showing others what their cameras can do that no other cameras on earth can
do nor will ever do.
Jamie O'Connor
That's a bunch of bullshit. Putting CHDK on a card does not invalidate their use
with other cameras. CHDK creates its own folders that have never shown an
incompatibility issue with any other cameras. I even put CHDK on Micro-SD cards
that I use in my MP3 players so I can use those as instant CHDK camera backup
cards.
This moron troll has never even used CHDK, I'll bet.
Alan Browne
> Hello,
>
> I was wondering what is the experience of people who have used CHDK
> (http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ). In your view, does the increased
> access to camera hardware and other features worthwhile the effort to
> get it working in a camera? Any stories to tell?
I wouldn't use it even if I had a camera that could use it.
If you're serious enough about photography you tend to get cameras with
larger, lower noise sensors as well as the capabilities that CHDK
provides.
I can see where it would have genuine application for some for specific
purposes, but I would bet most people who do it, do so because they can
rather than 'cause it provides some real benefit.
As Pete points out, let's see some full samples that show the advantage.
> Thanks.
You're welcome.
> PS: People who have never used it need not reply. I hope this will
> keep the flame wars and dolt fanatics away.
As to your PS, well, your post was on topic and so was my reply.
Cheers,
Alan.
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
TrollSpotter
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>If you're serious enough about photography you tend to get cameras with
>larger, lower noise sensors as well as the capabilities that CHDK
>provides.
Ooops, the only problem here is that no other cameras on earth can do what CHDK
provides. Try again, troll.
Hint: You might want to educate yourself next time.
LD
news:xLmTk.6208$Ei5....@flpi143.ffdc.sbc.com...
Thanks for all the info and pay no heed to the carping.
SMS
> I wouldn't use it even if I had a camera that could use it.
It's there to use when you want it. You don't have to turn it on if you
don't need it.
> If you're serious enough about photography you tend to get cameras with
> larger, lower noise sensors as well as the capabilities that CHDK
> provides.
Yes, don't expect CHDK to turn a P&S into a D-SLR. It doesn't fix noisy
sensors, it doesn't increase dynamic range, and it doesn't speed up
auto-focus. No one ever claimed it would do those things. That's why you
have a D-SLR.
It provides some extra information that may be helpful, i.e. the exact
zoom position, battery level in %, grid lines, live histogram etc. One
feature that some people may find useful is that you can enable the
optical zoom during video, something that most P&S cameras have disabled
because the noise of the zoom is picked up in the audio.
> I can see where it would have genuine application for some for specific
> purposes, but I would bet most people who do it, do so because they can
> rather than 'cause it provides some real benefit.
Well I find it moderately useful. It does have benefits. It's a bit
kludgey but WTH, it's free.
> As Pete points out, let's see some full samples that show the advantage.
To show an advantage would require some sort of side by side comparison,
with and without it. That's not going to happen. However it adds a lot
of features that are present on D-SLRs that some people may find useful.
I almost hate to admit I use it, since it's something that apparently
our favorite troll has a great affection for!
TrollSpotter
You seemed to have missed out on reading the header of this post, SMS. He's
asking for opinions from those that have ACTUALLY USED CHDK.
Everything that you've posted so far, and the comments from the other DSLR-troll
fanatics like yourself, only proves that you've only barely read about it, never
used it.
SMS
> Thanks for all the info and pay no heed to the carping.
I think I miss a lot of the carping with my kill-files and NewsProxy, so
I'm not sure what you're talking about.
One thing to remember is that once you install CHDK, there's some
setting you need to customize for your camera. I.e., the battery voltage
setting is a bit too high, so even with new fully charged batteries
fresh off the charger it shows only about 85% capacity. The programmers
probably didn't look at the voltage/capacity curves for the different
types of batteries, and it may be just a linear voltage/capacity curve
which is incorrect. They need to read my Battery Data web site!
Even though you have to manually enable CHDK every time you turn on the
camera (unless you're using 4GB or less memory cards in which case
there's a way to auto-enable), it retains whatever settings you made
(unless you change memory cards). So it's a good idea to make sure you
have the same settings on all memory cards you may use.
If you have multiple Canon cameras with CHDK, remember that the program
is camera specific. Don't swap cards and enable the wrong program for
the camera. I.e. I have three Canon P&S cameras that can use CHDK and
that use SD and SDHC cards. But on the child unit and spousal unit A570
IS I haven't used CHDK, only on my SD series, and it's a different build
for each. Actually if the card was used in one of the A570 cameras it
wouldn't matter because the users wouldn't know how to turn it on (one
advantage of the manual enabling I guess).
If you have any more questions about CHDK let me know. I've been using
it for a long time and I think I've tried most of the features.
ernie_glaston
>LD wrote:
>
>> Thanks for all the info and pay no heed to the carping.
>
>I think I miss a lot of the carping with my kill-files and NewsProxy, so
>I'm not sure what you're talking about.
>
>One thing to remember is that once you install CHDK, there's some
>setting you need to customize for your camera. I.e., the battery voltage
>setting is a bit too high, so even with new fully charged batteries
>fresh off the charger it shows only about 85% capacity. The programmers
>probably didn't look at the voltage/capacity curves for the different
>types of batteries, and it may be just a linear voltage/capacity curve
>which is incorrect. They need to read my Battery Data web site!
No, you moron. The CHDK authors know all too well that all batteries from all
manufacturers all have their unique charge and discharge curves. If you knew
anything at all about CHDK you'd know that it's designed to be as universally
adaptable as possible. If someone wants their battery meter to show full
discharge at 50%, to give them that much warning, they can do that too. The LAST
place they'd ever go to is your lame and misinformed battery pages for advice.
Get a clue and quit making up stories about something you've never used and know
nothing about.
>
>Even though you have to manually enable CHDK every time you turn on the
>camera (unless you're using 4GB or less memory cards in which case
>there's a way to auto-enable), it retains whatever settings you made
>(unless you change memory cards). So it's a good idea to make sure you
>have the same settings on all memory cards you may use.
You fuckin' moron. Just configure it on one card, then copy all those favorite
settings to all other cards by copying the CHDK.CFG file over. CLEARLY STATED IN
THE FAQ! You've not even read that much.
And you do NOT have to manually load CHDK every time. That's only for idiots
like you who have never used it and don't know that there auto-loading was
solved over a year ago on all cameras.
>
>If you have any more questions about CHDK let me know. I've been using
>it for a long time and I think I've tried most of the features.
Oh yeah, just the person to ask for more advice, a moron troll who's never even
used CHDK. How wise.
Taylor Andersen
>>One thing to remember is that once you install CHDK, there's some
>>setting you need to customize for your camera. I.e., the battery voltage
>>setting is a bit too high, so even with new fully charged batteries
>>fresh off the charger it shows only about 85% capacity. The programmers
>>probably didn't look at the voltage/capacity curves for the different
>>types of batteries, and it may be just a linear voltage/capacity curve
>>which is incorrect. They need to read my Battery Data web site!
>
>No, you moron. The CHDK authors know all too well that all batteries from all
>manufacturers all have their unique charge and discharge curves. If you knew
>anything at all about CHDK you'd know that it's designed to be as universally
>adaptable as possible. If someone wants their battery meter to show full
>discharge at 50%, to give them that much warning, they can do that too. The LAST
>place they'd ever go to is your lame and misinformed battery pages for advice.
>
>Get a clue and quit making up stories about something you've never used and know
>nothing about.
The funniest part about all of this? Anyone reading 85% battery capacity on
CHDK's meter off of a fresh charge clearly has a defective charger or batteries.
The default installation settings for CHDK are pretty close to average for full
charge on most NiMH batteries. I don't think I've used any brand yet that's not
shown CHDK's battery meter at anything other than 100% after a fresh recharge.
So either this troll has never used CHDK, or he's just proved that he doesn't
know a thing about batteries or chargers, the thing he prides himself on most of
all.
Catch-22. It HAS TO BE one or the other.
How much do you want to bet that it's both? He's never used CHDK, _AND_ that he
doesn't know a thing about batteries. Like everything else he does (like that
computer-controlled "Old Faithful" geyser story, that was a good laugh), it's
ALL, every last bit of it, been made-up. :)
Pete D
"TrollSpotter" <trolls...@trollspotter.org> wrote in message
news:313sh41a5cnm6mdf9...@4ax.com...
And you have we know that and we expect that you are about to post some of
these great photos for us all to see??
Or are you, come on big guy walk the walk..........
Waiting, waiting.....................................
GaryAtkins
>
>And you have we know that and we expect that you are about to post some of
>these great photos for us all to see??
>
>Or are you, come on big guy walk the walk..........
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Waiting, waiting.....................................
>
>
On your knees boy, just where you like to be. Beg some more. LOL
Steve
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:44:32 -0500, "H.S." <hAs.sa...@gTHEmail.com>
wrote:
>
>Hello,
>
>I was wondering what is the experience of people who have used CHDK
>(http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ). In your view, does the increased
>access to camera hardware and other features worthwhile the effort to
>get it working in a camera? Any stories to tell?
>
>Thanks.
>
>PS: People who have never used it need not reply. I hope this will keep
>the flame wars and dolt fanatics away.
I use it quite a bit on one of my P&S cameras. Whether or not it's
worth getting it to work on one of your cameras depends entirely on
you and whether your camera out of the box does what you want or
whether you'd like some of the features of CHDK.
Some of the things I use are being able to save raw images when the
camera only saves jpgs by default. I don't save raw all the time but
it is useful when I'm having issues with white balance. I can read
them into Gimp with UFRaw.
Another thing I like is knowing exactly what the precise battery
status is all the time. The camera by default only lets you know when
the batteries get so low you can only take a few more shots.
A few other things I use are the RGB histograms and the "zebra", which
blinks areas that are over and/or under exposed.
I also like the intervalometer for doing things like taking a series
of shots during a sunset. I turn off the display and review to save
batteries, sit the camera down on something and set it to take a shot
every 5 seconds without touching it. I'll come back a half hour later
and have a nice time lapse sequence of the sunset.
Of course, my DSLR does all of those things out of the box... RGBY
histograms, blinking blown highlights and shadows, intervalometer,
saving RAW data, detailed battery status, etc. etc. But it's cool to
get those features in a P&S even though Canon left them out when they
could have easily included them.
The above is pretty much 99% of what I use CHDK for. There's also a
lot of stuff there that I might play around with once in a while but
rarely use.
Steve
Steve
>LD wrote:
>
>> Thanks for all the info and pay no heed to the carping.
>
>I think I miss a lot of the carping with my kill-files and NewsProxy, so
>I'm not sure what you're talking about.
>
>One thing to remember is that once you install CHDK, there's some
>setting you need to customize for your camera. I.e., the battery voltage
>setting is a bit too high, so even with new fully charged batteries
>fresh off the charger it shows only about 85% capacity. The programmers
>probably didn't look at the voltage/capacity curves for the different
>types of batteries, and it may be just a linear voltage/capacity curve
>which is incorrect. They need to read my Battery Data web site!
That probably depends on the type of batteries and the camera and
maybe the version you've loaded. When I installed CHDK on mine, I
didn't have to change anything it reads 100% with freshly charged NiMH
batteries.
Steve
GonzalasSmith
The default installation settings have already been averaged for each camera
build. So you can discount a problem with whatever camera he's using. And all
versions are the same in that regard for over a year. The guy's a nothing but a
virtual-photographer resident-troll who has now proved to the world that he
doesn't even know how to charge batteries properly. Deal with it.
Chalk up one more advantage to using and promoting CHDK, it PROVES who is and is
not a virtual-photographer troll on usenet. :-)
LOL
SteveII
>Of course, my DSLR does all of those things out of the box... RGBY
>histograms, blinking blown highlights and shadows
No, your DSLR does NOT do these things. _NO_ DSLR in existence can do what CHDK
can do. This is why so many DSLR owners are desperately trying to get CHDK
ported to their cameras. (read the forums)
Your DSLR may display SOME of these features you mention, but only AFTER the
fact, not as real-time previews in your viewfinder before you even hit the
shutter button. Your DSLR will also not do 90% of what CHDK can do. (Much to the
dismay of the DSLR owners that are trying to convert CHDK to their cameras.) It
most certainly won't do lengthy intervalometer durations as CHDK can do (I
personally wrote the most popular intervalometer script), not without an
expensive intervalometer DSLR remote. And it can't even begin to cover the
bracketing types and ranges that CHDK cameras can do. Nor does your DSLR have
built-in motion detection fast enough to capture a lightning-strike, even when
the camera is hand-held (proof of this on the CHDK forums, the very first
hand-held lighting capture I've ever seen in existence, all due to CHDK).
If you are going to aspire to being an effective ignorance-biased DSLR-troll for
usenet, at least try to do it with less easily disproved comments.
Pete D
"GaryAtkins" <gat...@gatkins.com> wrote in message
news:mvosh49i9lvs0g5si...@4ax.com...
And yet here we wait..............
Waiting, waiting, waiting........................
So much talk so little proof.
Alan Browne
> Alan Browne wrote:
>> As Pete points out, let's see some full samples that show the advantage.
>
> To show an advantage would require some sort of side by side comparison,
> with and without it. That's not going to happen.
Why not? Somebody must be enthusiastic enough about it to show the
advantages.
> I almost hate to admit I use it, since it's something that apparently
> our favorite troll has a great affection for!
That's quite irrelevant. The troll I mean.
SMS
> SMS wrote:
>> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>>> As Pete points out, let's see some full samples that show the advantage.
>>
>> To show an advantage would require some sort of side by side
>> comparison, with and without it. That's not going to happen.
>
> Why not? Somebody must be enthusiastic enough about it to show the
> advantages.
Do you think that a live histogram is ever useful in improving your shots?
Do you think that being able to control the shutter speed is ever useful?
Do you think that knowing your battery level to a finer degree would
ever help you avoid missing a shot?
Do you think that shooting in RAW mode is ever advantageous?
These are not things that you can easily quantify in a side by side
comparison.
I find CHDK useful on occasion. It won't fix the inherent issues with a
P&S, the auto-focus/shutter lag is still slow, the dynamic range is
still poorer, and the noise is still higher. But it _does_ have its uses.
SMS
> That probably depends on the type of batteries and the camera and
> maybe the version you've loaded. When I installed CHDK on mine, I
> didn't have to change anything it reads 100% with freshly charged NiMH
> batteries.
It's possible that they set the voltage too low in that case, You want
to set the top voltage in the Advanced Menu > OSD Parameters > Battery
Parameters to the level where freshly charged batteries are at 99% (or
where the percentage indicator changes from 100% to 99% shortly after
the batteries are installed. If it's staying at 100% for very long then
the high voltage setting is too low. It's hard to gauge NiMH batteries
because they have such a flat discharge curve, unlike Li-Ion which have
a pretty linear discharge curve.
For my camera, they probably looked at the voltage, not under load, of a
fully charged Li-Ion battery, and made that the default setting. In
reality they need to look at the voltage under load for each camera with
a fully charged battery, and set that at the top voltage, and look at
where the camera shuts down and set that as the low voltage. It's
different for every camera, and it's a lot of work because you'd have to
run some wires out of the camera to be able to do this. It's no big
deal, no one expects these guys to be experts on battery technology.
You can also do it empirically by putting a fully charged battery into
the camera, then changing the top voltage setting to where the
percentage indicator falls from 100% to 99%. That's how I did it.
Figuring out the proper bottom setting is a bit more of a pain, but it
can be done.
Since each version of CHDK is used in a variety of cameras, you can't
expect the writers, all volunteers, to go into such detail. I just
wanted to make sure people that use CHDK understand that there is some
work to do to customize it to their camera.
SMS
> Of course, my DSLR does all of those things out of the box... RGBY
> histograms, blinking blown highlights and shadows, intervalometer,
> saving RAW data, detailed battery status, etc. etc. But it's cool to
> get those features in a P&S even though Canon left them out when they
> could have easily included them.
That's how I feel about CHDK. It gives me a lot of the features that are
built into the D-SLR, suff that's often useful.
I guess I don't really blame Canon (and every other manufacturer) for
not including this stuff on P&S models but putting it into D-SLRs. It's
a totally different market. They figured that anyone wanting these
features is also concerned about low noise, wide dynamic range, low
shutter lag, etc., things that you can't get on a P&S no matter how
fully featured the firmware.
Steve
>Chalk up one more advantage to using and promoting CHDK, it PROVES who is and is
>not a virtual-photographer troll on usenet. :-)
>
>LOL
With our resident P&S troll promoting CHDK, it's plainly obvious that
it does NOT do that.
Steve
DustinAppleby
>
>Since each version of CHDK is used in a variety of cameras, you can't
>expect the writers, all volunteers, to go into such detail. I just
>wanted to make sure people that use CHDK understand that there is some
>work to do to customize it to their camera.
Actually, they understand WAY more than you ever will. Each version of CHDK is
tailored specifically for that camera model, even down to the firmware version.
See previous replies to your virtual-photographer's insanity that fully exposes
you for the total fraud that you are.
Another reason to love CHDK, it has now proved that SMS doesn't even know how to
charge his batteries (does he even have any?). LOL
MSM
Dear Resident-Troll,
Many points outlined below completely disprove your usual resident-troll
bullshit. You can either read it and educate yourself, or don't read it and
continue to prove to everyone that you are nothing but a virtual-photographer
newsgroup-troll and a fool.
1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in
existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent
wide-angle and telephoto (tel-extender) add-on lenses for many makes and models
of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your photography
gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can far surpass any
range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or will ever be made for
larger format cameras.
2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than any
DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used with
high-quality tel-extenders, which by the way, do not reduce the lens' original
aperture one bit. Only DSLRs suffer from that problem due to the manner in which
their tele-converters work. They can also have higher quality full-frame
180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than any
DSLR and its glass in existence. Some excellent fish-eye adapters can be added
to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic-aberration nor
edge-softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this allows you to
seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm equivalent focal-length
up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own lens.
3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than larger
sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic Range vs. an
APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg
4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent) sensors
used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much smaller.
Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more
easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs. This also
allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than DSLR glass which is
only good for one aperture setting per lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S
glass can out-resolve even the best DSLR glass ever made. After all is said and
done, you will spend 1/4th to 1/50th the price that you would have to in order
to get comparable performance in a DSLR camera. When you buy a DSLR you are
investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips, external
flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc. etc. The
outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial DSLR body
purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their banks.
5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera plus one
small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing just a couple
pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would require over 10 to 20
pounds of DSLR body and lenses. You can carry the whole P&S kit in one roomy
pocket of a wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy
backpack. You also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to
stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive
lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most
inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.
6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer, you
will not be barred from using your camera at public events, stage-performances,
and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots, you won't so easily
alert all those within a block around, from the obnoxious noise that your DSLR
is making, that you are capturing anyone's images. For the more dedicated
wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not endanger your life when
photographing potentially dangerous animals by alerting them to your presence.
7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which
allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms
response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you may
capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where any
evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance. Without the
need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware into remote
areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time allotted for bringing
back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for unattended time-lapse
photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you may capture those unusual
or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a rare slime-mold's propagation,
that you happened to find in a mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest
laptop or other time-lapse hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that
CHDK brings to the creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to
list them all here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )
8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See:
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast subject
motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the need of
artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone. Nor will
their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane shutter
distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when photographed with all
DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions example-image link in #10.)
9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including shutter-speeds
of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g.
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_High-Speed_Shutter_%26_Flash-Sync without
the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter flash-units that
must strobe for the full duration of the shutter's curtain to pass over the
frame. The other downside to those kinds of flash units, is that the
light-output is greatly reduced the faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed
used that is faster than your camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the
flash output. Not so when using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash
is recorded no matter the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK
capable cameras where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the
lightning-fast single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is
1/10,000 of a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a
second, then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also
don't require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may
be used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that can
compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example:
http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html
10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and
limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions
(focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images//4/46/Focalplane_shutter_distortions.jpg
do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground, 90-degrees
from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously loud slapping
mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily damaged, expensive
repair costs, etc.
11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh
environments, or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their
vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street, you're not
worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot (fewer missed
shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete while you do, and
not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos that day from having
gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous photographer you're no
longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of unneeded glass, allowing you to
carry more of the important supplies, like food and water, allowing you to trek
much further than you've ever been able to travel before with your old D/SLR
bricks.
12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep DOF
required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image
destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the
planet can compare in the quality of available-light macro photography that can
be accomplished with nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera.
13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo audio
recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature where a
still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong. E.g. recording
the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living field-mice. With your
P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't miss that once-in-a-lifetime
chance to record some unexpected event, like the passage of a bright meteor in
the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion, or any other newsworthy event. Imagine
the gaping hole in our history of the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras
there at the time. The mystery of how it exploded would have never been solved.
Or the amateur 8mm film of the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready
P&S camera being with you all the time might capture something that will be a
valuable part of human history one day.
14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your final
image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your composition by
trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With the ability to
overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area alerts (and dozens of
other important shooting data) directly on your electronic viewfinder display
you are also not going to guess if your exposure might be right this time. Nor
do you have to remove your eye from the view of your subject to check some
external LCD histogram display, ruining your chances of getting that perfect
shot when it happens.
15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural
settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and sensors
that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as light-levels
drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in total darkness by
using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other multi-purpose cameras are
capable of taking still-frame and videos of nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as
well. Shooting videos and still-frames of nocturnal animals in the total-dark,
without disturbing their natural behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away
with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is not only possible, it's been done, many times, by
myself. (An interesting and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly
stomped to death by an irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash
come from.)
16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly 100%
silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither scaring it away
nor changing their natural behavior with your existence. Nor, as previously
mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your direction. You are recording
nature as it is, and should be, not some artificial human-changed distortion of
reality and nature.
17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the greatest
degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence, with its
inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving subject will
EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A leaf-shutter or
electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will capture your moving
subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S photography will no longer lead a
biologist nor other scientist down another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.
18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all the
popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those agonizingly
slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the shot is recorded.
In the hands of an experienced photographer that will always rely on prefocusing
their camera, there is no hit & miss auto-focusing that happens on all
auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This allows you to take advantage of the
faster shutter response times of P&S cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that
if you really want to get every shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in
any camera.
19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately relay
the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate preview of
what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3 seconds or
1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the crisp sharp outlines
of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100% accurately depicted in
your viewfinder before you even record the shot. What you see in a P&S camera is
truly what you get. You won't have to guess in advance at what shutter speed to
use to obtain those artistic effects or those scientifically accurate nature
studies that you require or that your client requires. When testing CHDK P&S
cameras that could have shutter speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was
amazed that I could half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a
Dremel-Drill's 30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real
time, without ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when
lowering shutter speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls,
instantly seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never
realize what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and
wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.
20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and
background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use of its
own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender on the
front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would with a DSLR.
Framing and the included background is relative to the subject at the time and
has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens in use. Your f/ratio
(which determines your depth-of-field), is a computation of focal-length divided
by aperture diameter. Increase the focal-length and you make your DOF shallower.
No different than opening up the aperture to accomplish the same. The two
methods are identically related where DOF is concerned.
21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs with
just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up on ISO25
and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S camera can't
go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S camera can have
larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in existence. The time
when you really need a fast lens to prevent camera-shake that gets amplified at
those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs you can take perfectly fine hand-held
images at super-zoom settings. Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures
at long focal lengths require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They
need high ISOs, you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are
some excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to
ISO1600 and more.
22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any way
determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of around
$100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer today. IF they
have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award winning photograph with
a cardboard Brownie Box camera made a century ago. If you can't take excellent
photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able to get good photos on a DSLR
either. Never blame your inability to obtain a good photograph on the kind of
camera that you own. Those who claim they NEED a DSLR are only fooling
themselves and all others. These are the same people that buy a new camera every
year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only had the right camera, a better camera,
better lenses, faster lenses, then I will be a great photographer!" Camera
company's love these people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will
make their photography better, because they never were a good photographer to
begin with. The irony is that by them thinking that they only need to throw
money at the problem, they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real
problem is. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why these
self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras instantly reveal to
them their piss-poor photography skills.
23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S
photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera gear.
They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile and tell
them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the look on their
face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that lost money, and a
sadness just courses through every fiber of their being. Wondering why they
can't get photographs as good after they spent all that time and money. Get good
on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun experience.
24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth mentioning
the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that is instantly
ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more award-winning
photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home, collecting dust,
and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack or camera bag, hoping
that you'll lug it around again some day.
25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not
advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you. That's
like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS STUPID AND I
DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only take it out when
needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with all your photos. And
should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're not out $20,000. They are
inexpensive to replace.
There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more than
enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras are just
better, all around. No doubt about it.
The phenomenon of everyone yelling "You NEED a DSLR!" can be summed up in just
one short phrase:
"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
foolish thing."
Steve
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 01:26:34 -0600, SteveII <stev...@steve.com>
wrote:
>On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 06:56:48 GMT, Steve <st...@example.com> wrote:
>
>>Of course, my DSLR does all of those things out of the box... RGBY
>>histograms, blinking blown highlights and shadows
>
>No, your DSLR does NOT do these things. _NO_ DSLR in existence can do what CHDK
>can do. This is why so many DSLR owners are desperately trying to get CHDK
>ported to their cameras. (read the forums)
My DSLR does do everything I mentioned that I use 99% of the time from
CHDK. As I said, CHDK can let you do more than what I normally use.
But most of that is not useful for practical photography.
However, this is why I have *both* a DSLR and a P&S that does CHDK. So
when I want to take pictures where image quality, speedy response,
etc., is important I use the DSLR. When I want to play with fancy
gimicks with CHDK, I use the P&S. But what I mostly use CHDK for is
to give me some of the functionalty on the P&S that the DSLR already
has. There's no right or wrong way to use it, and that's what *I* use
it for most of the time.
>dismay of the DSLR owners that are trying to convert CHDK to their cameras.) It
>most certainly won't do lengthy intervalometer durations as CHDK can do (I
>personally wrote the most popular intervalometer script), not without an
>expensive intervalometer DSLR remote. And it can't even begin to cover the
Mine does. I can do lengthy intervals just like CHDK does. Anywhere
from 1 second to 1 day per shot. Mine can even do things that I
haven't found in CHDK, although I haven't looked very hard since I
rarely do interval photography. Just for the very occasional sunset.
But for instance, I can pick the number of shots taken at each
interval. I can even automatically bracket exposure, flash, white
balance, etc. at each interval. And the menu to set all this up is
incredibly more user friendly on my DSLR than with CHDK.
>bracketing types and ranges that CHDK cameras can do. Nor does your DSLR have
Yes, my DSLR can do all of the bracketing types and ranges that are
normally useful. CHDK adds a ranges to bracketing that are not very
useful for normal photography. And when I say useful, here the things
my DSLR can bracket:
White balance: anywhere from 2 to 9 shots with anywhere from 1 to 3
increments per shot.
Exposure in 1/3, 1/2 or 1 EV steps with anywhere from 2 to 9 shots per
bracket. You can bracket shutter speed, aperture or flash power or
combinations of them. I can even change the order of the bracketing,
with the metered value first and then low/high or in the middle with
low first and high after.
If I want to use gimmicky bracketing types, I'll pick up the P&S with
CHDK. If I want good image quality and speedy response and the most
normally useful bracketing selections, I'll pick up the DSLR. It's my
choice, which is the way it should be.
>built-in motion detection fast enough to capture a lightning-strike, even when
>the camera is hand-held (proof of this on the CHDK forums, the very first
>hand-held lighting capture I've ever seen in existence, all due to CHDK).
And if I want to have motion detect shutter release I'll use the P&S
with CHDK. It's a cool feature. If I want better pictures I'll use
the DSLR. This is a simple concept that you have to grasp.
Steve
SMS
> That probably depends on the type of batteries and the camera and
> maybe the version you've loaded. When I installed CHDK on mine, I
> didn't have to change anything it reads 100% with freshly charged NiMH
> batteries.
Yeah, one thing I noticed is that the version of CHDK I use, v1.00e, is
used on multiple cameras, some of which use four AA batteries (A610),
some of which use two AA batteries (A570), and some of which use a
single 3.7V Li-Ion battery (SD800), but there are different sub-versions
for each camera with what the designers believed were the proper default
settings.
They have the high-voltage for the Li-Ion set to 4.1V, for a 3.7V Li-Ion
battery. Yes, a fully charged Li-Ion battery, not under load, does have
a voltage of about 4.1 volts, and this is where they probably got that
value from.
But as soon as you put the battery into the camera, and it's under load,
the voltage is well under 4.1V, and it quickly falls to the rated
voltage per cell of 3.7V. This could lead some people to think "OMG,
there's something wrong with my batteries or charger" when in fact it's
really just the wrong top setting for the voltage.
I added a section about CHDK battery parameters to the battery web site
at "http://batterydata.com/".
Steve
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:00:53 -0800, SMS <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:
I like the top setting for the voltage to read 100% with fresh, out of
the charger batteries and then fall to 90% as I use it a little bit.
Some people might like it to stay at 100% for longer. That's why you
can tailor the levels.
Unless you have complex battery management with electronics in the
battery, or make measurements of the current, voltage and temperature,
you're not going to get an exact battery status. But the point is
that the battery level with CHDK, even if it's not calibrated exactly,
is way more useful than just the low battery warning that comes
standard with most P&S cameras.
Since CHDK gives me battery voltage and temperature, if there was
hardware in the camera to measure current then you could have a very
accurate battery meter.
Steve
Alan Browne
> I like the top setting for the voltage to read 100% with fresh, out of
> the charger batteries and then fall to 90% as I use it a little bit.
> Some people might like it to stay at 100% for longer. That's why you
> can tailor the levels.
I look forward to my next camera which uses the Sony InfoLithium
batteries. These incorporate circuitry that reports the amount of
energy left in the battery without requiring an estimating algorithm
that uses time-on and voltage level.
The downside is no 3rd party battery maker, so the replacement price
will be higher.
Steve
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 12:33:34 -0500, Alan Browne
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>Steve wrote:
>
>> I like the top setting for the voltage to read 100% with fresh, out of
>> the charger batteries and then fall to 90% as I use it a little bit.
>> Some people might like it to stay at 100% for longer. That's why you
>> can tailor the levels.
>
>I look forward to my next camera which uses the Sony InfoLithium
>batteries. These incorporate circuitry that reports the amount of
>energy left in the battery without requiring an estimating algorithm
>that uses time-on and voltage level.
>
>The downside is no 3rd party battery maker, so the replacement price
>will be higher.
I've had that capability for quite some time now in my D200. The
battery keeps track of it's condition (so you know when it will need
replacing soon because battery performance will soon start to
degrade), level of charge, and number of shots taken *with that
battery* since it was charged. It's a useful feature set to have that
CHDK on a P&S can only approximate.
The higher cost of replacement for having those very useful features
is minor when you consider that the delta cost is spread out over tens
of thousands of shots.
Steve
Alan Browne
> On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 12:33:34 -0500, Alan Browne
> <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> Steve wrote:
>>
>>> I like the top setting for the voltage to read 100% with fresh, out of
>>> the charger batteries and then fall to 90% as I use it a little bit.
>>> Some people might like it to stay at 100% for longer. That's why you
>>> can tailor the levels.
>> I look forward to my next camera which uses the Sony InfoLithium
>> batteries. These incorporate circuitry that reports the amount of
>> energy left in the battery without requiring an estimating algorithm
>> that uses time-on and voltage level.
>>
>> The downside is no 3rd party battery maker, so the replacement price
>> will be higher.
>
> I've had that capability for quite some time now in my D200. The
Good stuff. I assumed it was unique to Sony.
> battery keeps track of it's condition (so you know when it will need
> replacing soon because battery performance will soon start to
> degrade), level of charge, and number of shots taken *with that
> battery* since it was charged. It's a useful feature set to have that
> CHDK on a P&S can only approximate.
> The higher cost of replacement for having those very useful features
> is minor when you consider that the delta cost is spread out over tens
> of thousands of shots.
That's always the case for each bit of gear, isn't it?
Pete D
"Alan Browne" <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:A6ydnZOsbdQKfYPU...@giganews.com...
> SMS wrote:
>> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>>> As Pete points out, let's see some full samples that show the advantage.
>>
>> To show an advantage would require some sort of side by side comparison,
>> with and without it. That's not going to happen.
>
> Why not? Somebody must be enthusiastic enough about it to show the
> advantages.
>
>> I almost hate to admit I use it, since it's something that apparently our
>> favorite troll has a great affection for!
>
> That's quite irrelevant. The troll I mean.
I don't even care about side by side examples, any examples would be good,
all we get though is, well, nothing but blah, blah, blah.
Eli Storm
>Steve wrote:
>
>> That probably depends on the type of batteries and the camera and
>> maybe the version you've loaded. When I installed CHDK on mine, I
>> didn't have to change anything it reads 100% with freshly charged NiMH
>> batteries.
>
>Yeah, one thing I noticed is that the version of CHDK I use, v1.00e, is
>used on multiple cameras, some of which use four AA batteries (A610),
>some of which use two AA batteries (A570), and some of which use a
>single 3.7V Li-Ion battery (SD800), but there are different sub-versions
>for each camera with what the designers believed were the proper default
>settings.
>
You complete and total idiot you.
Don't you realize that the version number has NOTHING to do with cross-model
compatibility? That's only for that camera's particular FIRMWARE version number.
Do tell, how a DigicII camera with a firmware number of 1.00f is in ANY way
related to DigicIII model of camera with the same firmware version number of
1.00f?
EACH AND EVERY build of CHDK has to be tailored to that particular camera model,
and even tailored to that particular camera's firmware version. In only a few
rare incidents have the same build of CHDK ever worked on the same camera model
with different firmware version numbers because their firmwares were that
closely related. (Pay attention, I said the SAME camera models with different
firmware versions.)
You fuckin' idiot and moron. Go ahead read some more web pages without actually
ever using anything. This seems to work oh so well for virtual-photographer
trolls like you.
The only problem then is all the people who know more than you ever will in your
lifetime have to go and clean up all the phenomenal piles of bullshit that you
left behind in your sorry excuse of a life.
trevor-johnson
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>Steve wrote:
>
>> I like the top setting for the voltage to read 100% with fresh, out of
>> the charger batteries and then fall to 90% as I use it a little bit.
>> Some people might like it to stay at 100% for longer. That's why you
>> can tailor the levels.
>
>I look forward to my next camera which uses the Sony InfoLithium
>batteries. These incorporate circuitry that reports the amount of
>energy left in the battery without requiring an estimating algorithm
>that uses time-on and voltage level.
>
>The downside is no 3rd party battery maker, so the replacement price
>will be higher.
I guess I'll have to return the 4 Info-Lithium batteries that I bought at half
the price, with more capacity, from a 3rd party maker, that have been running
strong for 3 years now.
You wouldn't lie to me would you? (Or is that just your phenomenal ignorance
speaking out of your ass again?)
DanielShort
>White balance: anywhere from 2 to 9 shots with anywhere from 1 to 3
>increments per shot.
What a shame. With CHDK you can use the in-camera "RAW Develop" feature to apply
any and all in-camera processing effects to the RAW file and save as many new
versions as you want. White-balance, B&W, film effects, Custom Color modes,
novelty color-accent stuff, any adjustment on the camera can be reapplied to the
RAW file taken with the camera, right on the card while its in the camera. Why
you can even apply digital zoom to a RAW file to use it as a quick in-camera
cropping feature, nibbling off no more than a small border at a time.No need to
take bracketed shots, you can do all that from just one shot. Any time you like,
even years later if you find that you want a different version from that RAW
file. Using CHDK's "RAW Develop" feature is like pointing the camera at the
exact same scene again, and reapplying any new settings that you want to it. The
RAW file now taking place of the original sensor data.
Oh yeah, how's that RAW Sum and RAW Average feature working for you, where you
can produce IN-CAMERA HDR images and noise-free long-exposure images by
averaging out all noise from multiple shots. That's working well for you in that
DSLR of yours?
>Exposure in 1/3, 1/2 or 1 EV steps with anywhere from 2 to 9 shots per
>bracket.
How limiting. I'd return a camera like that if that's all it offered.
Go read the CHDK wiki pages on what you don't have. You'll spend hours reading
things listed there that cannot nor will ever exists on your low-life DSLR.
>You can bracket shutter speed, aperture or flash power or
>combinations of them. I can even change the order of the bracketing,
>with the metered value first and then low/high or in the middle with
>low first and high after.
Oh, I guess you missed the part where the various bracketing flavors of CHDK
were stated.
How's that motion-detection working on that DSLR of yours?
Design any new viewfinder overlays for easier framing and composing for
final-crop print sizes? Or using a golden-ratio alignment or aerial-photography
grid? If not, I hear you can buy specialty focusing screens and change them in
some of those DSLR. Try that if you can't design your own, or load your own
anytime that you want while in the middle of a shooting session. In any colors
that you want. :)
How are those programmable intervalometer scripts working for you that
accurately adjust exposure from sunlight to starlight and back again? You know,
the ones that can take exposures as short a .3 seconds apart, to days apart. The
ones that not only select how many shots to fire off at each interval, and at
what duration, but also includes the option to capture a high-quality video clip
of whatever duration you want at each interval, with or without the hi-res
still-frames. How are those features working out for you on your POS DSLR? How's
your intervalometer working for recording CD-quality stereo sound-tracks at
predefined intervals? That working well for you too?
(I could keep listing things but this would end up being as extensive as the 80%
of the Wiki that I authored for CHDK.)
In short ... YOU DON'T HAVE ONE CLUE TO HOW MUCH CHDK CAN DO.
But then, someone who's never used CHDK would be like that. They'd never even
once think that their DSLR can do as much as CHDK can do if they ever actually
used it.
You are to laugh at. You're doing nothing but making one gigantic asinine fool
of yourself.
SMS
> Steve wrote:
>
>> I like the top setting for the voltage to read 100% with fresh, out of
>> the charger batteries and then fall to 90% as I use it a little bit.
>> Some people might like it to stay at 100% for longer. That's why you
>> can tailor the levels.
>
> I look forward to my next camera which uses the Sony InfoLithium
> batteries. These incorporate circuitry that reports the amount of
> energy left in the battery without requiring an estimating algorithm
> that uses time-on and voltage level.
>
> The downside is no 3rd party battery maker, so the replacement price
> will be higher.
For very popular batteries there are after-market vendors of the
intelligent batteries. The problem you run into is with companies like
Sony that will change the firmware in new camera models to be
incompatible with Info-Lithium after-market batteries that worked with
earlier Sony Cameras. The battery maker will update the firmware in
their newer batteries, but there's a lag time.
SMS
>> The downside is no 3rd party battery maker, so the replacement price
>> will be higher.
>
> I've had that capability for quite some time now in my D200. The
> battery keeps track of it's condition (so you know when it will need
> replacing soon because battery performance will soon start to
> degrade), level of charge, and number of shots taken *with that
> battery* since it was charged.
There are after-market batteries for the D200.
See "http://sterlingtek.com/enbafornid2d.html". $18.49 for the EN-EL3e,
versus $9.99 for the EN-EL3.
Typically the after-market intelligent batteries lag six months to a
year from being introduced. You just have to be careful because newer
cameras, using the same battery, may not work with the older
after-market intelligent batteries. It's very similar to the problem
that companies like Sigma have faced with lenses; Canon will introduce a
new body, and older Sigma lenses that worked with older EOS compatible
bodies may not work on the new body until Sigma reverse engineers the
new camera.
> It's a useful feature set to have that CHDK on a P&S can only
approximate.
CHDK does not approximate an intelligent battery. They're just reading
the battery voltage, and approximating the percentage of charge left.
They don't keep track of the number of times the battery has been
charged, etc.
> The higher cost of replacement for having those very useful features
> is minor when you consider that the delta cost is spread out over tens
> of thousands of shots.
True. Especially once after-market intelligent batteries are on the market.
Steve
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 13:13:08 -0800, SMS <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:
>Steve wrote:
>
>>> The downside is no 3rd party battery maker, so the replacement price
>>> will be higher.
>>
>> I've had that capability for quite some time now in my D200. The
>> battery keeps track of it's condition (so you know when it will need
>> replacing soon because battery performance will soon start to
>> degrade), level of charge, and number of shots taken *with that
>> battery* since it was charged.
>
>There are after-market batteries for the D200.
>
>See "http://sterlingtek.com/enbafornid2d.html". $18.49 for the EN-EL3e,
>versus $9.99 for the EN-EL3.
>
>Typically the after-market intelligent batteries lag six months to a
>year from being introduced. You just have to be careful because newer
>cameras, using the same battery, may not work with the older
>after-market intelligent batteries. It's very similar to the problem
>that companies like Sigma have faced with lenses; Canon will introduce a
>new body, and older Sigma lenses that worked with older EOS compatible
>bodies may not work on the new body until Sigma reverse engineers the
>new camera.
I have 3 EN-EL3e's all in excellent condition and I rotate them. I
won't have to buy another one for years. I'll look into 3rd party
batteries when I need to. But one of my old Canon P&S uses a
proprietary Li-ion battery (NH-1L/NB-1LH) and I've had to get
replacements. 3rd party batteries are available for about $6.
Steve
Steve
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 20:31:39 GMT, JT's Keeper
<justa...@mad.scientist.com> wrote:
>In one of these many postings (might even have been the P&S Troll) it
>was suggested looking at photos posted to Flickr:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=CHDK&w=all
>
>The above shows that there might be 4,363 examples to look at... this
>link here is but one example entitled 1/80,000 of a second shutter
>speed?! http://www.flickr.com/photos/001fj/2494307010/
>
>Camera: Canon PowerShot S3IS
>
>CHDK零 settings:
>Shutter speed--> 1/80,000 second (don靖 ask, I don靖 know if that零
>really true or not, but that零 what CHDK displayed! It certainly doesn靖
>look like 1/80,000 because I靶e seen droplets shots taken with less than
>5% of this shutter speed and they looked just as good if not better!
>Beside, is 1/80,000 of a second shutter speed really possible?!)
>Av--> 16.00
>ISO--> 50
Many instances of CHDK letting you set something, telling you that
it's set that way, but it really isn't. That's why I don't bother
with those esoteric settings. Many of them just aren't right. You
have to test them with your camera. If you take a shot at 1/80,000
sec, f/16, ISO50 and it looks the same as a shot taken at 1/4000 sec,
f/16, ISO50, then you probably were not really at 1/80,000 even though
thats what CHDK said.
Steve
B. Davies
>That's why I don't bother
>with those esoteric settings.
Translation: "Steve said, 'I wouldn't know what to do with them even if I had a
camera with those advanced settings for more creative photography on it.'"
Steve
>On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:44:20 GMT, Steve <st...@example.com> wrote:
>
>>White balance: anywhere from 2 to 9 shots with anywhere from 1 to 3
>>increments per shot.
>
>What a shame. With CHDK you can use the in-camera "RAW Develop" feature to apply
I'm not sure why that's a shame. My DSLR lets me save RAW images by
default while I need CHDK to do that. Of course the white balance
bracketing is only useful for JPEGs. No need to bracket white balance
with raw but the feature is there if you want to use it. Just like
many of the features of CHDK.
>any and all in-camera processing effects to the RAW file and save as many new
>versions as you want. White-balance, B&W, film effects, Custom Color modes,
[...]
>even years later if you find that you want a different version from that RAW
>file. Using CHDK's "RAW Develop" feature is like pointing the camera at the
>exact same scene again, and reapplying any new settings that you want to it. The
>RAW file now taking place of the original sensor data.
I've used CHDK's raw develop. It's nowhere near as capable as any
off-camera software that works with raw. I'd much rather take the raw
image onto a PC and work with it there.
>Oh yeah, how's that RAW Sum and RAW Average feature working for you, where you
>can produce IN-CAMERA HDR images and noise-free long-exposure images by
>averaging out all noise from multiple shots. That's working well for you in that
>DSLR of yours?
Yes, it absolutely works in my DSLR. My DSLR has a feature called
image overlay that combines saved RAW images into a new RAW image.
Every time you type something about a DSLR, from this image overlay to
braketing to interval shooting, you reveal just how ignorant you
really are.
Then again, you've already admitted that you're incapable of properly
framing a subject with a 97% coverage OVF *and* you've admitted that
you're incapable of telling the difference between 640x480 vs.
1920x1080 resolution on a 20" monitor from 20" away.
So it'e pretty obvious why you don't notice how much superior images
from a DSLR are than from a P&S.
SMS
> Many instances of CHDK letting you set something, telling you that
> it's set that way, but it really isn't. That's why I don't bother
> with those esoteric settings.
Yeah, in some cases they went overboard with settings, letting you set
something to a value that the camera can't really do. You won't see that
in a D-SLR which comes with most of the CHDK functionality, but that
doesn't let you set parameters that the camera can't actually do.
Replying-To-A-Sea-Of-Morons
Clearly outlined and fully explained in the CHDK Wiki, catch up:
"Since the discovery of many new override features, some far surpassing what the
cameras were originally sold to do, it has been found that each make and model
of camera may have variations in the absolute limits of Shutter-Speeds, F-Stops,
ISO-Values, Motion-Detection Speed, among others."
"Important! -- Just because you can set an override shutter-speed or f/stop on
your camera with CHDK, it doesn't mean your camera can actually do that
shutter-speed or f/stop. Be sure you have tested to make sure that extreme
setting is actually making a difference in your resulting images."
With further instructions to show people how to easily test their cameras. A
database of limits for each model is being developed as CHDK continues to grow.
This database is dependent on whoever is willing to test their cameras and
submit those test results. People who do not have their cameras cannot test them
for them.
THIS "NO LIMITS POLICY" IS INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED INTO THE FUNCTIONS OF CHDK SO
THAT AT NO TIME WILL ANY CAMERA'S FEATURES BE LIMITED BY ANYONE'S FIRMWARE,
CANON'S OR OTHERWISE. IF AN END USER ACCIDENTALLY FINDS A WAY TO UNLOCK A
FEATURE PREVIOUSLY UNKNOWN (this is exactly how the longer and ultra-fast
shutter speeds were discovered, and then became a menued feature of CHDK), THEN
THAT WILL BECOME PART OF FUTURE CHDK BUILDS.
You and Steve are the same fuckingly-stupid idiot troll, aren't you. You're both
just as ignorant and say the same amazingly stupid things.
Go crawl back under your clueless-rocks.
ReplyingToUninterestingTrolls
>
>On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 14:31:55 -0600, DanielShort
><dsh...@mailunwanted.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:44:20 GMT, Steve <st...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>White balance: anywhere from 2 to 9 shots with anywhere from 1 to 3
>>>increments per shot.
>>
>>What a shame. With CHDK you can use the in-camera "RAW Develop" feature to apply
>
>I'm not sure why that's a shame. My DSLR lets me save RAW images by
>default while I need CHDK to do that. Of course the white balance
>bracketing is only useful for JPEGs. No need to bracket white balance
>with raw but the feature is there if you want to use it. Just like
>many of the features of CHDK.
>
>>any and all in-camera processing effects to the RAW file and save as many new
>>versions as you want. White-balance, B&W, film effects, Custom Color modes,
>[...]
>>even years later if you find that you want a different version from that RAW
>>file. Using CHDK's "RAW Develop" feature is like pointing the camera at the
>>exact same scene again, and reapplying any new settings that you want to it. The
>>RAW file now taking place of the original sensor data.
>
>I've used CHDK's raw develop. It's nowhere near as capable as any
>off-camera software that works with raw. I'd much rather take the raw
>image onto a PC and work with it there.
First you rave about all your white-balance bracketing, then you belittle the
idea of being able to do the very same thing and much more than that in a P&S
camera, even years later right in the camera from the original RAW files if one
so wants. No matter how I prove to you that a CHDK camera is far superior to any
DSLR that you can buy on the planet, you'll just twist and squirm around to
change your story and your mind at every turn to perpetuate your ignorance.
Self-induced ignorance is your way of life.
You're nothing but a clueless useless troll. That's all you are and will ever
be. Inventing things then changing your story around just to get attention for
it. No different than SMS. Just as all trolls do. But that doesn't mean you
can't be put to good use for others.
Many people are now aware of how much more advanced a CHDK P&S camera is than
any DSLR. You will never want to see it, but those with common sense and
intellect can clearly see. Thanks for giving me the excuse to post just a small
handful of those CHDK features for them to read, and to show them that even a
raving DSLR-lunatic like yourself can't discount those advanced capabilities of
P&S cameras. They might have not known otherwise.
How does it feel to know that you've managed to help dissuade perhaps thousands
of people from buying DSLRs this year because they now know they can get the
same things and very much more out of an inexpensive P&S camera than any DSLR
will ever have.
Hurts, don't it. LOL
Your DSLR-trolling just backfired. Big time. Though you'll never be bright
enough to realize that--which could be the funniest part of all.
Mark Thomas
You buy an ordinary p&s, then use CHDK to get more 'features', but you
are stuck with the p&s original sensor, original lens, original
electronics. It reminds me of something.... I've got it! It's just
like this:
http://media.urbandictionary.com/image/large/ricer-17803.jpg
(I'm pretty sure that is Vern's car.)
Robert L
<markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com> wrote:
>So I'm just trying to think of a good analogy.
>
>You buy an ordinary p&s, then use CHDK to get more 'features', but you
>are stuck with the p&s original sensor, original lens, original
>electronics. It reminds me of something.... I've got it! It's just
>like this:
Many points outlined below completely disprove your usual resident-troll
DonHendersen
wrote:
>In article <5fquh4li0ffc5bp2o...@4ax.com>,
> Replying-To-A-Sea-Of-Morons <correctingmi...@antispam.org>
> wrote:
>
>> "Important! -- Just because you can set an override shutter-speed or f/stop on
>> your camera with CHDK, it doesn't mean your camera can actually do that
>> shutter-speed or f/stop. Be sure you have tested to make sure that extreme
>> setting is actually making a difference in your resulting images."
>>
>
>I have NO way of knowing IF the Exif data provided is accurate (as to
>CDHK shutter-speed, f/stop etc...) in many of the photos up-loaded
>here...
>
> http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=all&q=CHDK&m=text
>
If in doubt just load up the corresponding JPG file into EXIFtool-GUI and look
in the MakerNotes. There, is recorded the shutter speed, aperture, and even
intermediate or expanded ISO ranges. The Canon firmware is incapable of
recording these new shutter, aperture, and ISO settings in standard EXIF tag
locations, but they are available from MakerNotes. Keeping in mind that these
are the ones that CHDK requested the camera to perform. Some models may not be
able to fully comply due to physical limitations. See the CHDK Wikia site for a
chart of known limits on camera models.
According to that chart on the Wikia, that water-drop photo was taken with a
1/40,000 second shutter speed, the S3 IS's maximum tested shutter speed. Though
since they used flash, the duration of the actual exposure could be as short as
1/60,000 second. The S3 IS's fastest flash rate, if they didn't set the flash to
anything more than the lowest manual level of output, out of thirteen 1/3rd EV
flash output steps. If he used more flash then you take the actual shutter
speed, whichever is the shorter duration of the two, at 1/40,000.
In either case, you are seeing a full-frame flash-sync image done at a 1/40,000
second shutter speed. Wholly outside the realm of any DSLR in existence or will
ever exist, due to that ancient slapping focal-plane shutter. Just use short
flash duration to accomplish the same with a DSLR? Yes, you can. Now try to do
the same in some brightly lit factory where you are trying to analyze the speed
of some machine's part during use. You need to be able to erase all ambient
lights from your exposure to get accurate readings from the photograph. Or the
same when done outside in bright sunlight. Or a million other situations where
you must use a shutter speed fast enough to rid your exposure of all extraneous
light. Take the previously posted example of the plasma discharge that had to be
analyzed for a physics lab. You can't use flash. It would overwhelm the very
subject you were trying to study. The one and only solution is a shutter speed
fast enough. Something that no DSLR that has ever existed, nor will ever exist,
be able to provide to professional photographers anywhere.
Pete D
And he didn't even need a special camera to capture that.
Blah, blah, blah....................
WayneCarllin
Dear Resident-Troll,
Your post is completely off-topic. Here are some topics that befit this
newsgroup. Please consider them for future discussions and posts:
Pete D
"Replying-To-A-Sea-Of-Morons" <correctingmi...@antispam.org> wrote
in message news:5fquh4li0ffc5bp2o...@4ax.com...
Speaking of cluelessness, how come the EXIF on that shot shows 1/3200 sec
not 1/80,000 sec. If you actually knew anything about photography you would
understand how silly you are looking.
Cheers.
Pete
Lyle Porter
>Speaking of cluelessness, how come the EXIF on that shot shows 1/3200 sec
>not 1/80,000 sec. If you actually knew anything about photography you would
>understand how silly you are looking.
>
>Cheers.
>
>Pete
>
Holy shit. I cannot for one moment believe some people's ignorance and
stupidity.
BECAUSE, moron: Canon's firmware will not allow CHDK to write the CHDK override
values into common EXIF tag locations (didn't you read this yet? It's been
stated at least 2 times so far in this thread as well as many places on the
Wikia for CHDK).
The most that each camera will do is record the topmost or bottommost limit that
are allowed by Canon's own firmware into those EXIF tags. But the new values ARE
recorded in MakerNotes. There's a simple utility that can be downloaded from the
CHDK Wikia site that allows you to overwrite all the Canon EXIF data with the
new CHDK data from the proper MakerNotes tags. (Rule #1 of CHDK and all CHDK
authors, NEVER touch the camera's original firmware nor alter it in any manner
with CHDK.)
The only people looking silly around here are all of you amazingly stupid,
imperceptive, and unaware DSLR-Trolls. No wonder that you buy DSLRs, you're this
fuckingly stupid and unconscious at the same time.
Pete D
"Lyle Porter" <lpo...@idontwantmail.com> wrote in message
news:2n2vh415da17c9t5s...@4ax.com...
Well that is almost as believavle as you actually posting some of these
amazing photos you have taken, lets see you walk the walk baby.....
Talk, talk, talk.......... small and noisy like all CHDK photos.....
Blah, blah, blah.......
Steve
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 18:41:58 -0600, Replying-To-A-Sea-Of-Morons
<correctingmi...@antispam.org> wrote:
>On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:52:14 -0800, SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>>Steve wrote:
>>
>>> Many instances of CHDK letting you set something, telling you that
>>> it's set that way, but it really isn't. That's why I don't bother
>>> with those esoteric settings.
>>
>>Yeah, in some cases they went overboard with settings, letting you set
>>something to a value that the camera can't really do. You won't see that
>>in a D-SLR which comes with most of the CHDK functionality, but that
>>doesn't let you set parameters that the camera can't actually do.
>
>Clearly outlined and fully explained in the CHDK Wiki, catch up:
>
>"Since the discovery of many new override features, some far surpassing what the
>cameras were originally sold to do, it has been found that each make and model
>of camera may have variations in the absolute limits of Shutter-Speeds, F-Stops,
>ISO-Values, Motion-Detection Speed, among others."
>
>"Important! -- Just because you can set an override shutter-speed or f/stop on
>your camera with CHDK, it doesn't mean your camera can actually do that
>shutter-speed or f/stop. Be sure you have tested to make sure that extreme
>setting is actually making a difference in your resulting images."
Thank you for confirming exactly what I said.
Pete D
"Steve" <st...@example.com> wrote in message
news:1mjvh4t75fnvqf3b2...@4ax.com...
Seems that the truth has no place here, I am truly flabbergastertated.
Steve
You can rave about CHDK all you want. It doesn't prove anything and
doesn't make the camera better than a DSLR. As I've said all along,
CHDK does have some nifty features. But it's also very kludgy and
doesn't always work right (i.e., do what it says it's doing.) If a
camera manufacturer released a firmware like CHDK, people would be
screaming bloody murder and running to return the piece of junk. And
yet, for technogeeks, it's fun to play with.
However, for all the extra goodies your P&S can do with CHDK, it still
can't rival the image quality of a DSLR in difficult situations.
So you can spout your spew as much as you want. All you're doing is
showing your ignorance.
SMS
>> "Important! -- Just because you can set an override shutter-speed or f/stop on
>> your camera with CHDK, it doesn't mean your camera can actually do that
>> shutter-speed or f/stop. Be sure you have tested to make sure that extreme
>> setting is actually making a difference in your resulting images."
>
> Thank you for confirming exactly what I said.
I'm not sure that our friend has ever actually used CHDK, even though he
talks about it endlessly. I've used it almost since it came out, I've
contributed to the wiki on CHDK, and I've showed many colleagues,
friends, and relatives how to use it. I always tell them the same three
facts:
1. I warn them not to get too excited at the values it lets you program
in, because in many cases the camera can't do them, so they need to be
sensible about the values they choose.
2. I explain to them that some of the default values in the build for
their camera may not be optimal, so they'll need to understand the
program and how to set the values to their optimal level.
3. I explain to them that while CHDK adds a lot of D-SLR like features
to a P&S, don't expect it to suddenly turn your P&S into a D-SLR! AF
speed, DOF, dynamic range, and noise aren't fixable in software! If you
want the best quality photos, get a D-SLR.
Once they're expectations are set to the proper level, they enjoy using
it, on occasion.
AaronAdams
>Steve wrote:
>
>>> "Important! -- Just because you can set an override shutter-speed or f/stop on
>>> your camera with CHDK, it doesn't mean your camera can actually do that
>>> shutter-speed or f/stop. Be sure you have tested to make sure that extreme
>>> setting is actually making a difference in your resulting images."
>>
>> Thank you for confirming exactly what I said.
>
>I'm not sure that our friend has ever actually used CHDK, even though he
>talks about it endlessly. I've used it almost since it came out, I've
>contributed to the wiki on CHDK,
So YOU'RE that royal jackoff who was always putting in all that misinformation
that had to be corrected every time. Thanks. Now I know who to blame for all
that extra work it took to correct your stupidity. Just like here on usenet.
Same thing. Now one more reason to despise you and make your troll-existence
into a living hell. You relentlessly spew misinformed crap, then someone who
actually knows what they are talking about has to come along to shovel away the
piles of manure that you left on the ground.
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit, eh? Trouble
is, eventually everyone finally figures out that you can't produce anything but
crap in your life.
Let me guess. You're the moron who was taking posts out of context for the
motion-detection parameters and wrongly thinking that those were MD facts, then
posting parts out of context to confuse everyone. You'll note that that page now
has a large warning on it. Hoping someone else will come along and fix it. I
gave up trying to correct all your amazingly uninformed crap. You clearly didn't
know one damn thing that you were talking about and always making things worse
and worse.
You useless piece of shit. Your great-grandparents should have been aborted.
> and I've showed many colleagues,
>friends, and relatives how to use it.
How can you show something to others that you've clearly never used? You've made
that more than obvious by what you've typed in this thread.
Is this like that computer-controlled geyser you wrote about?
You dumbfuck virtual-photographer troll. You're just as informed as that Steve
asswipe.
> I always tell them the same three
>facts:
>
>1. I warn them not to get too excited at the values it lets you program
>in, because in many cases the camera can't do them, so they need to be
>sensible about the values they choose.
>
>2. I explain to them that some of the default values in the build for
>their camera may not be optimal, so they'll need to understand the
>program and how to set the values to their optimal level.
>
>3. I explain to them that while CHDK adds a lot of D-SLR like features
>to a P&S, don't expect it to suddenly turn your P&S into a D-SLR! AF
>speed, DOF, dynamic range, and noise aren't fixable in software! If you
>want the best quality photos, get a D-SLR.
>
>Once they're expectations are set to the proper level, they enjoy using
>it, on occasion.
Many points outlined below completely disprove your usual resident-troll
bullshit. You can either read it and educate yourself, or don't read it and
continue to prove to everyone that you are nothing but a virtual-photographer
newsgroup-troll and a fool.
Justin C
[snip]
> No matter how I prove to you that a CHDK camera is far superior to any
> DSLR that you can buy on the planet...
[snip]
> Many people are now aware of how much more advanced a CHDK P&S camera
> is than any DSLR
[snip]
> advanced capabilities of P&S cameras.
[snip]
> [get] very much more out of an inexpensive P&S camera than any DSLR
> will ever have.
Well, it's obviously pointless for Canon and Nikon to go on making DSLR cameras. What savings in R&D, the reduction in productions costs, all great news for share-holders.
It's also quite funny to see the faces of the owners of camera store who are having to heavily discount all that obsolete DSLR stock just to get it out the door. Have you seen how cheap you can pick up a DSLR these days... I'd expect change if I traded in a Canon AE1.
Still, these P&S cameras are making the press/paparazzi much less conspicuous; it's also doing wonders for their bad-backs now that they don't have to carry a 20lb of gear to get good shots.
> Hurts, don't it. LOL
Oh yes, it's excruciating.
*plonk*
Justin.
--
Justin C, by the sea.
Alan Browne
> On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 12:33:34 -0500, Alan Browne
> <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> Steve wrote:
>>
>>> I like the top setting for the voltage to read 100% with fresh, out of
>>> the charger batteries and then fall to 90% as I use it a little bit.
>>> Some people might like it to stay at 100% for longer. That's why you
>>> can tailor the levels.
>> I look forward to my next camera which uses the Sony InfoLithium
>> batteries. These incorporate circuitry that reports the amount of
>> energy left in the battery without requiring an estimating algorithm
>> that uses time-on and voltage level.
>>
>> will be higher.
>
> the price, with more capacity, from a 3rd party maker, that have been running
> strong for 3 years now.
That's news to me, and very good news at that.
> You wouldn't lie to me would you? (Or is that just your phenomenal ignorance
> speaking out of your ass again?)
What trauma in your life has caused you to be such an idiotic jerk? A
cold distant father with a brutal streak? A mother who hardly paid
attention to you while you repeatedly witnessed her cheating on your
father? Perhaps you don't know who your father is? Vague insinuations
in the family about why your mother was so young when you were conceived?
Get therapy.
Alan Browne
> Pete D wrote:
>
>> "Alan Browne" <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
>> news:A6ydnZOsbdQKfYPU...@giganews.com...
>>> SMS wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>> As Pete points out, let's see some full samples that show the advantage.
>>>> To show an advantage would require some sort of side by side comparison,
>>>> with and without it. That's not going to happen.
>>> Why not? Somebody must be enthusiastic enough about it to show the
>>> advantages.
>>>
>>>> I almost hate to admit I use it, since it's something that apparently our
>>>> favorite troll has a great affection for!
>>> That's quite irrelevant. The troll I mean.
>>
>> I don't even care about side by side examples, any examples would be good,
>> all we get though is, well, nothing but blah, blah, blah.
>>
>
> In one of these many postings (might even have been the P&S Troll) it
> was suggested looking at photos posted to Flickr:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=CHDK&w=all
<snipped>
> Note to ANYONE reading this far down, I DO NOT own a camera capable of
> using CDHK... However it (CDHK) does seem to have uses, as always YMMV.
That's what I said in an earlier post... essentially, specific
advantages for specific purposes. This is not something most
photographers would need for a much wider range of photography.
However, the 1/80,000 speed can also be achieved on an SLR with a strobe
as it has been done since about WW II.
Somebody around these NG's (Littleboy?) suggested that the camera makers
provide us with "CameraBASIC" so that we can do whatever we want to the
camera. After all once we pay for it... this would include things like
electronic shuttering (a la Nikon d70).
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
Alan Browne
> Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>>> I like the top setting for the voltage to read 100% with fresh, out of
>>> the charger batteries and then fall to 90% as I use it a little bit.
>>> Some people might like it to stay at 100% for longer. That's why you
>>> can tailor the levels.
>>
>> I look forward to my next camera which uses the Sony InfoLithium
>> batteries. These incorporate circuitry that reports the amount of
>> energy left in the battery without requiring an estimating algorithm
>> that uses time-on and voltage level.
>>
>> The downside is no 3rd party battery maker, so the replacement price
>> will be higher.
>
> intelligent batteries. The problem you run into is with companies like
> Sony that will change the firmware in new camera models to be
> incompatible with Info-Lithium after-market batteries that worked with
> earlier Sony Cameras. The battery maker will update the firmware in
> their newer batteries, but there's a lag time.
So I've learned from the socially challenged therapy needing troll (he
occasionally says something useful ... and then messes his own nest with
foul droppings).
That's acceptable. My Maxxum 7D is still on the original battery after
3.5 years and 8000 frames or so and the battery seems to hold up as if new.
I doubt that my shooting pace with the a900 will be much faster, 'though
I do foresee a lot more studio time for it vice the 'blad. I hope to be
making 16x24 portraits with it quite soon.
CharlieThompkins
It sounds like you've had some and it didn't work for you. Who else would try to
invent such outlandish reasons for words on their computer monitor but someone
like you who is projecting what you went through and remembered from one of your
many extensive therapy sessions. Please submit your cries for help to someone
who might give a damn, but only if you pay them first.
BernieRastoni
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>That's what I said in an earlier post... essentially, specific
>advantages for specific purposes. This is not something most
>photographers would need for a much wider range of photography.
HuH?!? For much a wider range of photography and creativity this is exactly what
you would need. This is why advanced professional photographers relish all the
new capabilities that CHDK brings to the photography plate.
Do you often speak out of your ass and mouth at the same time with every
sentence?
They're one in the same orifice on you, isn't it. Either that or you always keep
one orifice firmly implanted in the other. Admit it, it'll do everyone and
yourself a world of good. The rest of us can see you doing exactly that, now you
just have to own up to it.
Pete D
"Alan Browne" <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
She has just come out and is having problems dealing with that..... give
her time.
rwalker
<wayne...@wayneindustries.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:29:21 +1100, "Pete D" <n...@email.com> wrote:
>
>>How right he was.
>>
>>And he didn't even need a special camera to capture that.
>>
>>
>>Blah, blah, blah....................
>>
>
>
>Dear Resident-Troll,
>
Name shifting asshole.
Alan Browne
> Alan Browne wrote:
>> SMS wrote:
>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>>>> advantage.
>>>
>>> To show an advantage would require some sort of side by side
>>> comparison, with and without it. That's not going to happen.
>>
>> Why not? Somebody must be enthusiastic enough about it to show the
>> advantages.
>
> shots?
>
> Do you think that being able to control the shutter speed is ever
> useful?
>
> Do you think that knowing your battery level to a finer degree would
> ever help you avoid missing a shot?
>
> Do you think that shooting in RAW mode is ever advantageous?
>
> These are not things that you can easily quantify in a side by side
> comparison.
>
> I find CHDK useful on occasion. It won't fix the inherent issues with
> a P&S, the auto-focus/shutter lag is still slow, the dynamic range is
> still poorer, and the noise is still higher. But it _does_ have its
> uses.
I didn't say that it did not have its uses; only that they are so
limited in such limited machines as to not be terribly interesting.
QuentonAlberts
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>I didn't say that it did not have its uses; only that they are so
>limited in such limited machines as to not be terribly interesting.
Perfectly revealing your amazingly limited level of creativity when it comes to
photography. Perhaps you should take up mimeography as a hobby. It would be
right up your alley. You can't make any errors doing the exact same thing that
millions of others have already done before you ever got here in another equally
outdated and antiquated medium. On the other hand, yes, you would make plenty of
errors. The very idea of learning something different would leave you in an
inescapable anxiety panic.
SMS
> I didn't say that it did not have its uses; only that they are so
> limited in such limited machines as to not be terribly interesting.
Well personally I find it useful and interesting. It's probably not
something I'd pay money for, at least in it's current state.
Look, people are going to be using P&S digital cameras for convenience,
even though everyone agrees that D-SLR results give much better results
in most situations. It's not always about getting the best results, it's
about having a small camera that you can carry with you all the time.
I like using it, but then I'm a techno-geek. I've helped out in the
documentation for it, which was rather lacking. The availability of CHDK
might tip the balance between two otherwise similar quality and
feature cameras, one Canon, one something else.
Reed Coleston
begin with. The irony is that, by them thinking that they only need to throw
PetroffGlastoni
>I've helped out in the documentation for it, which was rather lacking.
Toby
"SMS" <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:gOKUk.8661$YU2....@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com...
Good point. I'm actually considering buying a Canon P&S, even with its
horrible high ISO noise problems, so that I can play with CHDK.
Toby
Grant-D-Olson
Many points outlined below completely disprove your usual resident-troll
Steve
On 19 Nov 2008 02:25:01 -0600, "Toby" <kym...@hol.com> wrote:
>
>"SMS" <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote in message
>news:gOKUk.8661$YU2....@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> I like using it, but then I'm a techno-geek. I've helped out in the
>> documentation for it, which was rather lacking. The availability of CHDK
>> might tip the balance between two otherwise similar quality and feature
>> cameras, one Canon, one something else.
>
>Good point. I'm actually considering buying a Canon P&S, even with its
>horrible high ISO noise problems, so that I can play with CHDK.
That's exactly what I did. Except I only paid $30 for one, used but
in excellent like new condition, from craigslist. I figured, for $30
what the hell.
Steve
SMS
> Good point. I'm actually considering buying a Canon P&S, even with its
> horrible high ISO noise problems, so that I can play with CHDK.
No noisier at high-ISO than other P&S models from other manufacturers.
Dave Cranston
wrote:
>Grant-D-Olson says...
>
> > Any of the newer cameras of around $100 or more are
> > plenty good for nearly any talented photographer today.
> > IF they have talent to begin with.
>
>For a low-budget CHDK trial situation, perhaps buying a used
>camera on Ebay or Craigslist, what Canon model would be a
>particularly good value? Perhaps not a very recent model,
>but one that sold in large numbers and is known to perform
>well.
>
>I would be particularly interested in fairly low-light extended
>time-lapse sequences, and of course the RAW facility.
>
>Any suggestions would be appreciated.
An S2 IS might fit the bill if you are looking for good zoom reach. The best
CHDK performer being the S3 IS in overall image quality plus extended CHDK
features, extra scripting commands for the S-series too. The reason I suggest
the S2 is that, while not as good a camera as the S3 in features and has the
same lens as the S3 (the S5 had slightly lower quality images, but not by much),
it'll be much more inexpensive because everyone's looking for the S3. They're
getting hard to find at an agreeable price anymore, biddings usually skyrocket.
Once you install CHDK the feature-set and performance of the S2 will be nearly
identical to the S3. Not unlike how installing RockBox on any MP3 player
flattens the playing field, then they all perform the same (and all better than
what the manufacturer created).
If you want a smaller shirt-pocket model, 'fraid I can't help you there. You
might like to ask on the CHDK forum http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php , where
the owners and users of many compact CHDK models will be able to offer more
exacting advice. Or wait for more replies. :-)
Irwell
I had the SD1000 with CHDK, performed great for such a small pocket camera,
has a viewfinder as well.