 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / General Topics / June 2008upsizing a cell phone photo?
Help! The bad part about being even marginally capable with a camera and computer is that my friends think I'm a wizard--which I most certainly am not. So my buddy sends me a photo from his cell phone of his 95 year old mother and his 1 year old grandson--and wants me to get great prints for him. I cleaned up the jpg as best I could, but it's still too tiny to get a decent print from. Does anyone have any experience trying upsizing software on these little bitty jpegs? I don't expect even a good 5 x 7, but I'd sure love to be able to get him a decent 4 x 6 print. Any ideas? Any suggestions? Thanks Chris > Help! > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Any ideas? Any suggestions? Depends how bad the original is; if the pixel count is too low, the subject (or camera) moving too much, or the focus too "off" you're fundamentally stuffed. BugBear > Help! > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Chris Much depends on how many pixels it had to start with. Add in that most cellphone cameras have LOUSY lenses, and the problem is made worse. Other than upsizing with several different methods to pick the best, and sharpening, there probably isn't much you can do to make a silk purse from that sow's ear. >> Help! >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > sharpening, there probably isn't much you can do to make a silk purse > from that sow's ear. If he sent the image to you through the cellphone network, I would check the original on the phone - maybe it downscales the image before transmitting it, intended mainly for viewing on other cellphones? If so you might be able to get a higher-resolution original off the phone directly. > I cleaned up the jpg as best I could, but it's still too tiny to get a > decent print from. Does anyone have any experience trying upsizing > software on these little bitty jpegs? I don't expect even a good 5 x 7, > but I'd sure love to be able to get him a decent 4 x 6 print. http://www.general-cathexis.com/interpolation/index.html In rec.photo.digital Chris Pisarra <Chris@pisarra.com> wrote: > Help! > The bad part about being even marginally capable with a camera and > computer is that my friends think I'm a wizard--which I most certainly am > not. > So my buddy sends me a photo from his cell phone of his 95 year old > mother and his 1 year old grandson--and wants me to get great prints for > him. > I cleaned up the jpg as best I could, but it's still too tiny to get a > decent print from. Does anyone have any experience trying upsizing software > on these little bitty jpegs? I don't expect even a good 5 x 7, but I'd sure > love to be able to get him a decent 4 x 6 print. You have to explain to him that photographic wizardry is defeated by the powerful curse of the phone camera.  SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] > Help! > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Chris I can't think of a better opportunity to convince someone to start keeping a cheap camera with them all the time. Another precious photo op ruined by the cell phone. Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' >> Help! >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > keeping a cheap camera with them all the time. Another precious photo > op ruined by the cell phone. Not ALL cellphone cameras are bad, only MOST of them. Most cellphone cameras intentionally reduce the resolution in order to conserve storage, and reduce the time it costs to transmit the image to another phone to something the customer is willing to pay for. It is the PURPOSE that must be kept in mind. I believe the iPhone is 2mp, which is pretty good (and the photos look good on the iPhone screen). >>> Help! >>> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > PURPOSE that must be kept in mind. I believe the iPhone is 2mp, which > is pretty good (and the photos look good on the iPhone screen). Fair enough... if the PURPOSE of capturing an image is for an insurance adjuster to confirm a bent fender or the water line on the living room wall, fine, use a cell phone. OTOH, if the PURPOSE is for capturing a family moment, as described by the OP, reach for something more capable for the task at hand. Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' Another alternative is to cheat by putting a border around it. > Help! > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Chris > Help! > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Chris well, I went looking... I usually dont frequent cell phone photo galleries... however, of what I have seen, there are very few cell phone pictures from which a decent print cant be made. If you post a link to the picture, youdl likely get more help... otherwise, possibly, ask at one of the photo enhancement web sites ? > well, I went looking... I usually dont frequent cell phone photo > galleries... > however, of what I have seen, there are very few cell phone pictures > from which a decent print cant be made. I use my phone camera more than I should; it's with me a lot and it's unobtrusive and ubiquitous - no-one gets worried about phone cams. Some of my flikr images are off the phone (Sony Ericsson 3.2mp) and look OK on the www, although I have never printed any of them... http://www.flickr.com/photos/22615671@N06/2527533576/sizes/l/ I actually really like phone cameras, they have got lots of people making pictures that would not have made them otherwise. A truly democratic medium - the new Kodak? T >> well, I went looking... I usually dont frequent cell phone photo >> galleries... [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > pictures that would not have made them otherwise. A truly democratic > medium - the new Kodak? That's a pretty darned impressive photo for a cell phone. Chris >>> well, I went looking... I usually dont frequent cell phone photo >>> galleries... [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Chris Yeah, for a cell phone, it's one of the better ones - except for the oddity of capturing images of brick walls in portrait mode. Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' > except for the oddity of capturing images of brick walls in portrait mode. works though, n'est pas? Composition is in the eye of the beholder and all that. It's what's outside the frame, there's the first decision... Each to their own though eh. Anyway, I LIKE oddities! ;-) T > I use my phone camera more than I should; it's with me a lot and it's > unobtrusive and ubiquitous - no-one gets worried about phone cams. > > Some of my flikr images are off the phone (Sony Ericsson 3.2mp) and look > OK on the www, although I have never printed any of them... I've never used a cell phone cam ... in fact, I've only used a friend's cell phone, and only once. How big are the sensors on these gizmos, and what is the 35mm equivalent focal length of the lens? Doug McDonald > How big are the sensors on these gizmos, and what is the 35mm equivalent > focal length of the lens? Sony Ericsson K810i: http://www.sonyericsson.com/cws/products/mobilephones/specifications/k810i 3.2mp sensor, auto focus, image stabilisation, xenon flash, burst mode, macro, various scene modes, a good attempt at camera-like ergonomics for the buttons, removable memory cards (M2 cards, I use a 4gb) what's not to like? Best thing is, the price - at least here in UK, they are available free on contract. who needs a point-and-shoot? There is a 5mp version available now too. Oh, and they are small, discreet, batteries are cheap and hold loads of charge... Dunno who makes the lens, probably the same people that make lenses for Sony cameras? It's marked up on front 1-5.2mm and 1:2.8 but not knowing the sensor dimensions (after looking a fair bit) I have no clue as to 35mm equivalence. It's got x3 optical zoom though, and a radio, bluetooth, blog upload feature, mp3 player.... Seriously, these phones are getting good at taking pictures and they will only get better. Just get the cell phone with the best camera on it, for point and shoot why not? T > Dunno who makes the lens, probably the same people that make lenses for > Sony cameras? It's marked up on front 1-5.2mm and 1:2.8 but not knowing > the sensor dimensions (after looking a fair bit) I have no clue as to > 35mm equivalence. In the exif data perhaps: tag A420: equivalent focal lenghth for 35mm, and divided by tag 920A (true focal length) should yield the sensor dimensions. SignatureBertrand > In the exif data perhaps: tag A420: equivalent focal lenghth for 35mm, > and divided by tag 920A (true focal length) should yield the sensor > dimensions. I don't see these tags (using Irfanview to look at the EXIF data), is it possible the phone does not write the whole EXIF data to the file? Is there another way to read the file and see these tags? thanks, T >> In the exif data perhaps: tag A420: equivalent focal lenghth for 35mm, >> and divided by tag 920A (true focal length) should yield the sensor [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > possible the phone does not write the whole EXIF data to the file? Is > there another way to read the file and see these tags? May be manufacturer dependent. I just looked at EXIF from my three cameras: Fuji compact, Fuji bridge, Nikon DSLR. Only the Nikon EXIF shows a 35mm format focal length equivalent. (All show focal length.) SignatureBlinky Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project --> http://improve-usenet.org Found: a free GG-blocking news *feed* --> http://usenet4all.se >> How big are the sensors on these gizmos, and what is the 35mm equivalent >> focal length of the lens? [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > 35mm equivalence. It's got x3 optical zoom though, and a radio, > bluetooth, blog upload feature, mp3 player.... 1-5.2mm would be 5.2x zoom not 3x If we assume the wide end is 28mm eq. then it's a 28-140mm and f/2.8 is better than most P&S, in fact much better than any affordable DSLR lenses. That should be about a 1.3mm wide sensor which seems too small, my web cam's sensor is about 4x5mm. > Seriously, these phones are getting good at taking pictures and they > will only get better. > > Just get the cell phone with the best camera on it, for point and shoot > why not? Yes it makes sense, since we carry them anyways. I use my 1.3MP razr v3c (old model) for taking pics & videos. SignaturePaul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam > Help! > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Any ideas? Any suggestions? How was the file transferred to you? Is the original still available? Is it in focus with decent exposure? I have seen some darned good photos taken by cell phones that would easily print nicely at 5 x 7. > Help! > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Any ideas? Any suggestions? Print it small with a nice matt & frame. SignaturePaul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam > Any ideas? Any suggestions? It can't do miracles, but "reshade" is pretty impressive. --- The Bill of Rights - Void where prohibited by Law. <snip> > Any ideas? Any suggestions? For the picture you've got now, there isn't a great deal more you can do to clean it up. It depends on how the picture was sent to you. If it was sent as an MMS or PXT (multimedia SMS) message, then it would have been automatically resampled and sent at 640x480 (VGA resolution) regardless of the sensor in the sender's phone and that's one of t the limitations of the MMS/PXT messaging system. If the picture was sent via an email message from their phone, then it could be sent at the full resolution that the camera in the phone is set to (just like email from any other computer). If you received it as an email, but with a "from" address that looks a bit like [PXT from +0155530145], then it's a multimedia SMS sent to email and is under the same 640x480 limit as phone to phone sending. It would be better if your buddy could download the picture from his phone to his computer (via data cable, bluetooth or card reader) at full resolution and then email it to you as an ordinary attachment. Then you'd have the best picture to start tweaking. > Help! > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Chris Can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. I fixed one up for you a bit, sent an HTML post here with it, never showed up. If you want it send me an address (use "reply to" for mine). SignaturedadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.