Spiderweb pics from my phone - 56k grab coffee

[visualpoet]

These were taken with my Sony Ericsson c905a. Unfortunately, the whole web was wiped out by rain or the landscapers.

[buckysaccord93]

nice pics. what kinda spider?

and.. it instantly loaded for me lol i viewed them as soon as i clicked

[visualpoet]

nice pics. what kinda spider?

and.. it instantly loaded for me lol i viewed them as soon as i clicked

No idea, some type of garden spider. I hate that the flash whited him out so badly. I'm surprised they loaded so quickly, they're 8.1 mp.

This pic is from me trying to sheild the flash with my finger, you can see him better, but he's not that crisp in this one.

[MikeW]

3264x2448

[visualpoet]

3264x2448

Yeah, I know. My next one I think I'm going for one of the few 12 mp camera phones.

[MikeW]

12mp phone? That's just overkill, lol.

[visualpoet]

12mp phone? That's just overkill, lol.

Yeah, but it saves me from carrying a phone and a camera with me.

[Ralphie]

Rememer you don't really need MP to obtain good quality images.

I think 8 is really as good as it's going to get for a phone.

[deevergote]

Spiders freak me the hell out...

I wanna poop sticky strings, build a web, and then live on it. You know, catch my food on it... Yeah.

[92vig]

You know that the "8mp" from a cell phone isn't the same as the "8mp" from a real camera, right?

[visualpoet]

You know that the "8mp" from a cell phone isn't the same as the "8mp" from a real camera, right?

There's not much difference in quality between my 8.1 phone and my 8.1 Vivitar "real" camera. Each one has it's ups and downs. And it's hard to deny that these pics are fantastic for a phone. I don't know that the Vivitar would have done as good a job.

[92vig]

I'm not saying the quality and whatnot wasn't good...because it is.

I was just stating that the cameras the cell phones use are not like the ones then "real" cameras use. The lenses are completely different (cheap lenses on the cell phones) and when you expand the image size of the "real" camera, it will be better resolution than the one taken by the cell phone at the same measurements.

It also has to do with the white balance on the picture...whichever camera gets it correct, it'll look "better"...but when you're up in the 8+mp cameras, you won't notice a lot of difference.

[visualpoet]

I'm not saying the quality and whatnot wasn't good...because it is.

I was just stating that the cameras the cell phones use are not like the ones then "real" cameras use. The lenses are completely different (cheap lenses on the cell phones) and when you expand the image size of the "real" camera, it will be better resolution than the one taken by the cell phone at the same measurements.

It also has to do with the white balance on the picture...whichever camera gets it correct, it'll look "better"...but when you're up in the 8+mp cameras, you won't notice a lot of difference.

Now you made me wonder which was better. It occurred to me that I couldn't really judge without taking identical pics, so I did, just to see how much different they came out. They're uploading to flickr now, and the 3 from my real camera are each more than a meg bigger than the same three from my c905a. I don't know if that's better image compression on the Sony side, or a better image on the Vivitar side... We'll see in a few.

I took one each of a medium distance shot, a macro with flash and a macro without flash with each camera. I have noticed that the c905a takes a better pic without the flash than it does with it most of the time.

Sony Ericsson c905a on the left, Vivitar Vivicam 8625 on the right. (Slight difference in perspective on macros due to difference in camera depth. 3/4 inch vs almost 3 inches. I lined up the back of the cameras equidistant from the target, instead of the lenses, not thinking)







The phone actually seems to capture the colors better than the camera does, but suffers from over exposure using the flash on the macro setting.

Full size, phone first.

[92vig]

Take a look at the large pictures you posted at the bottom. The one taken with the Vivitar has a crisper image around the BIC logo as well as the swirl designs. This could be due to the lens being closer to the object though.

In the pictures at the top, the Vivitar focuses more on the objects in front, while the Sony extends its focus range to the siding and even planting pots in the background.

Both images come out to be 3264x2448 full size, or are they resized to that?
I would like to see the Vivitar picture zoomed in compared to the Sony and see if there is a distinct difference.

[visualpoet]

Take a look at the large pictures you posted at the bottom. The one taken with the Vivitar has a crisper image around the BIC logo as well as the swirl designs. This could be due to the lens being closer to the object though.

In the pictures at the top, the Vivitar focuses more on the objects in front, while the Sony extends its focus range to the siding and even planting pots in the background.

Both images come out to be 3264x2448 full size, or are they resized to that?
I would like to see the Vivitar picture zoomed in compared to the Sony and see if there is a distinct difference.

Both come out to that size, they're all untouched, just taken and uploaded.
When you say zoomed in, do you mean actually zoomed with the camera, or enlarged beyond actual size? The Vivitar has a far better zoom quality, since part of it is optical, as opposed to the purely digital zoom of the phone. I think that other than color, the Vivitar is slightly better. In the full size images, if you look at the siding, the camera seems to have slightly finer grain (to use an old film term) than the phone does.

This one is a combination of both images, cropped and resized to 3264X 2289 for comparison.