[Way OT question] What's wrong with this picture/camera?
Robert Fovell
[Please copy reply by email; my usenet access is sporadic]
I'm on vacation in the beautiful Pacific Northwest... and my Olympus
C-2000Z digital camera is acting up, in a new way that is. Here's an example:
http://home.pacbell.net/rfovell/P6180010.jpg
In the upper left-hand quadrant, there is a black smudge. This has been
appearing sporadically. Sunday last I was photographing orchids, and
started seeing the smudge in the same place. Through systematic
experimentation, I found the smudge only appeared when I was using the
macro lens setting AND had the flash on. It had nothing to do with the
file compression (TIFF vs. JPEG), mode/quality/size of image, which of
my two SmartMedia cards I was using, which NiMH battery set I was using.
I could photograph a blank white wall and have the smudge appear, then
turn off the macro or the flash, and note its absence.
And then it was gone, even with the macro/flash combo... the camera was
okay again.
Yesterday morning, the Smudge returned. Same place... but on photos
made without either macro or flash (as in the one cited above). Not on
the first pictures I took that day, not on the last, but on some of
them, and in a sequence to boot.
This morning, no Smudge.. at least not yet.
Any ideas (besides "time for a new camera" <g>)? First signs of
senility in the CCD? I haven't yet systematically evaluated aperture
and/or shutter speed combos yet... that's next.
(Please copy via email!)
--
Beautiful cactus flower pictures:
http://www.bol.ucla.edu/~rfovell/cereus.html
"A billion here, a billion there - pretty soon, you're talking about
real money." -- Former Senator Everett Dirksen
Jason McNorton
>
> [Please copy reply by email; my usenet access is sporadic]
>
> I'm on vacation in the beautiful Pacific Northwest... and my Olympus
> C-2000Z digital camera is acting up, in a new way that is. Here's an example:
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/rfovell/P6180010.jpg
>
> In the upper left-hand quadrant, there is a black smudge. This has been
> appearing sporadically. Sunday last I was photographing orchids, and
> started seeing the smudge in the same place. Through systematic
> experimentation, I found the smudge only appeared when I was using the
> macro lens setting AND had the flash on. It had nothing to do with the
> file compression (TIFF vs. JPEG), mode/quality/size of image, which of
> my two SmartMedia cards I was using, which NiMH battery set I was using.
> I could photograph a blank white wall and have the smudge appear, then
> turn off the macro or the flash, and note its absence.
>
> And then it was gone, even with the macro/flash combo... the camera was
> okay again.
>
> Yesterday morning, the Smudge returned. Same place... but on photos
> made without either macro or flash (as in the one cited above). Not on
> the first pictures I took that day, not on the last, but on some of
> them, and in a sequence to boot.
>
> This morning, no Smudge.. at least not yet.
>
> Any ideas (besides "time for a new camera" <g>)? First signs of
> senility in the CCD? I haven't yet systematically evaluated aperture
> and/or shutter speed combos yet... that's next.
You are obviously capturing spectral entities.. Submit them to
ghostpictures.com
Woofbert
<jm...@msg.ti.com> wrote:
Jason McNorton...
Smudges appearing identically in pictures taken in different locations
but with consistent equipment and lighting situations are spectral
entities? Get a fuckin life.
Hell, set up your video camera in a place with flying insects and let it
take video ffor a while. You'll probably capture some newly discovered
"spectral entities" called "spikes." They look like black rods hanging
in the air. Typical pseudoscience: find something you don't understand,
fail to investigate it properly, and scream about some new paranormal
phenomenon.
Robert Fovell...
Was the smudge in exactly the same place in all instances, with and
without that lens and flash? What was in the area of the smudge on the
pictures were it did not appear? (Was it obscured by complex image?)
What happens when you photograph a white wall? Does the smudge only
appear at wide apertures?
Have you cleaned the lenses?
--
Woofbert: Chief Rocket Surgeon, Infernosoft
email <woofbert at infernosoft dot com>
web http://www.infernosoft.com/woofbert
Jason McNorton
woofbe...@infernosoft.com says...
whoop whoop... Sarcasm alert in effect. Anyone that missed the sarcasm
of my post is hereby notified by large siren.
Woofbert
<jm...@msg.ti.com> wrote:
> whoop whoop... Sarcasm alert in effect. Anyone that missed the sarcasm
> of my post is hereby notified by large siren.
Dodo. A simple }: ) would have sufficed. }: )
Alan Baker
Robert Fovell <rfo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>[Please copy reply by email; my usenet access is sporadic]
>
>I'm on vacation in the beautiful Pacific Northwest...
Whereabouts Robert? He said asking from the Pacific Northwest...
Please carry on.
> and my Olympus
>C-2000Z digital camera is acting up, in a new way that is. Here's an example:
>
>http://home.pacbell.net/rfovell/P6180010.jpg
>
>In the upper left-hand quadrant, there is a black smudge. This has been
>appearing sporadically. Sunday last I was photographing orchids, and
>started seeing the smudge in the same place. Through systematic
>experimentation, I found the smudge only appeared when I was using the
>macro lens setting AND had the flash on. It had nothing to do with the
>file compression (TIFF vs. JPEG), mode/quality/size of image, which of
>my two SmartMedia cards I was using, which NiMH battery set I was using.
> I could photograph a blank white wall and have the smudge appear, then
>turn off the macro or the flash, and note its absence.
>
>And then it was gone, even with the macro/flash combo... the camera was
>okay again.
>
>Yesterday morning, the Smudge returned. Same place... but on photos
>made without either macro or flash (as in the one cited above). Not on
>the first pictures I took that day, not on the last, but on some of
>them, and in a sequence to boot.
>
>This morning, no Smudge.. at least not yet.
>
>Any ideas (besides "time for a new camera" <g>)? First signs of
>senility in the CCD? I haven't yet systematically evaluated aperture
>and/or shutter speed combos yet... that's next.
>
>(Please copy via email!)
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the
bottom of that cupboard."
Robert Fovell
Woofbert wrote:
>
> In article <MPG.1599529df...@news.ti.com>, Jason McNorton
> <jm...@msg.ti.com> wrote:
> > You are obviously capturing spectral entities.. Submit them to
> > ghostpictures.com
>
> Jason McNorton...
> Smudges appearing identically in pictures taken in different locations
> but with consistent equipment and lighting situations are spectral
> entities? Get a fuckin life.
Well, it could have been a picture of a sane and intelligent windroid...
nah, we know that's a myth ;-)
>
> Hell, set up your video camera in a place with flying insects and let it
> take video ffor a while. You'll probably capture some newly discovered
> "spectral entities" called "spikes." They look like black rods hanging
> in the air. Typical pseudoscience: find something you don't understand,
> fail to investigate it properly, and scream about some new paranormal
> phenomenon.
>
> Robert Fovell...
> Was the smudge in exactly the same place in all instances, with and
> without that lens and flash?
I believe so, yes.
> What was in the area of the smudge on the
> pictures were it did not appear? (Was it obscured by complex image?)
All sorts of image textures and colors: white flowers, blue sky,
faces... does not appear to have a predilection for subject/type.
> What happens when you photograph a white wall?
On Sunday, photographing the white wall produced the smudge, but ONLY
when using the macro and flash. On Tuesday, the smudge occurred on
non-macro, non-flash pictures, but only early in the day. Today -- on
several dozens of pictures -- no smudges. I photographed lilies and a
graduation ceremony today.
> Does the smudge only
> appear at wide apertures?
When/if the smudge returns, I'll test it. I did a whole range of
aperture and shutter speed tests on white wall today -- no smudge.
>
> Have you cleaned the lenses?
Yes. It has come and gone, tho, without doing anything to the lens.
Weird.
Robert Fovell
Alan Baker wrote:
>
> In article <3B2F8A58...@yahoo.com>,
> Robert Fovell <rfo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >[Please copy reply by email; my usenet access is sporadic]
> >
> >I'm on vacation in the beautiful Pacific Northwest...
>
> Whereabouts Robert? He said asking from the Pacific Northwest...
Seattle. The smudged picture is of Mt. Rainier which IMNSHO is the most
beautiful place on Earth.
Still trying to figure out why I got lured away from here a decade ago ;-)
Robert Fovell
Mathue wrote:
>
> In article <3B2F8A58...@yahoo.com>, Robert Fovell
> <rfo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > [Please copy reply by email; my usenet access is sporadic]
> >
> > I'm on vacation in the beautiful Pacific Northwest... and my Olympus
> > C-2000Z digital camera is acting up, in a new way that is. Here's an example:
> >
> > http://home.pacbell.net/rfovell/P6180010.jpg
> >
>
> Looks like a particle to me. Can you take the lens off that camera?
Lens is not removable -- not that I've been able to tell, anyway.
My thought was a particle, too, but I can't make that hypothesis fit the
facts as I have them at this point. Granted, my understanding of the
camera's technical aspects is limited.
Weird.
Woofbert
<rfo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Was the smudge in exactly the same place in all instances, with and
> > without that lens and flash?
>
> I believe so, yes.
>
> > What was in the area of the smudge on the
> > pictures were it did not appear? (Was it obscured by complex image?)
>
> All sorts of image textures and colors: white flowers, blue sky,
> faces... does not appear to have a predilection for subject/type.
It's something on the lens. Definitely.
> > What happens when you photograph a white wall?
>
> On Sunday, photographing the white wall produced the smudge, but ONLY
> when using the macro and flash. On Tuesday, the smudge occurred on
> non-macro, non-flash pictures, but only early in the day. Today -- on
> several dozens of pictures -- no smudges. I photographed lilies and a
> graduation ceremony today.
You should test in different lighting conditions: ambient light coming
at the camera may obscure the smudge's effect -- or change it from a
shadow to a brightening.
> > Does the smudge only
> > appear at wide apertures?
>
> When/if the smudge returns, I'll test it. I did a whole range of
> aperture and shutter speed tests on white wall today -- no smudge.
>
> > Have you cleaned the lenses?
>
> Yes. It has come and gone, tho, without doing anything to the lens.
>
> Weird.
Yes. Weird. Look at aperture settings and ambient light. If you shine a
small lamp directly at the camera from the side so that the lamp itself
is not visible in the image, does the smudge turn from a dark one to a
light one?
Examine the lens itself, in the upper left quadrant. You may want to
shine a small flashlight at it. This should not be a problem for the CCD
because it's usually hidden by a shutter. You may be able to see a
speck, possibly on an inside lens surface. That would mean returning the
camera.
John C. Randolph
I've seen this kind of problem in CCD's before, and it was temperature-related.
Was it particularly cold when you took this shot?
-jcr
J. Tim
Just another idea...
If this is an SLR style camera, also be sure that the eyepiece is
covered if you're composing shots via the LCD. Direct light in through
that opening could effect the results when the shot is snapped. This is
mentioned in SONY's documentation for my SLR style cybershot. Might be
similar for your Olympus.
Woofbert
<jcrN...@idiom.com> wrote:
Hmmmm! A single region on the CCD is temperature-sensitive differently
from the rest of the chip?