Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 23, 2002, 7:22 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 67
Default Fuji S602z-- problem. Why does it take so long to save image

when shooting pictures in the 6m mode, it takes almost 3 min to save...and sometimes the camera freezes, i need to take out the batteries and restart.

Anyone else experienced this prob?

last week my F601z broke down, this week my 602 is acting weird, i am not impressed with Fuji.
dorae006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 24, 2002, 3:37 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

I shoot 3M fine mode, 6Mpix no advantage - see my other posts. When I tried 6Mpix compressed, I think the release time was about 10-15 seconds- certainly useable. However, TIFF mode (again no advantage), took much.. much longer. Have you tried another card?

Hammer the card in movie mode, that sorts out the men from the boys. If the card works at 640x480 x30fps in movie mode without freezing you've probably got a good one. Make sure you're on at least 1800mAh NiMh batts and NOT alkalines.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2002, 2:16 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 58
Default

Your memory is your problem. You went out and got the CF Type I card, not the Ultra, didn't cha? You should have spent the extra $20, I find the CF Type I Ultra to be better than 4 times faster at storing images.

Still, though, at 6MP High you're shooting roughly 18MB images. The camera internals have all the bandwidth you could want for, trust me, it's the memory that's the bottleneck. Even with the Ultra memory I find when I shoot at 6MP High it still takes upwards of 20 or 30 seconds to store the image.

This begs the question, though, of why you're shooting at that resolution. At most you should be shooting at 6MP Fine...and even then only if you plan on blowing the image up from its normal size of 40" x 30" by more than about 10 times in each direction. Do you really have a printer that can print a 400" x 300" (that's 33'4" x 25') image at 72 pixels/inch!? Somehow, I doubt it.

Seriously, unless you're planning on doing some SERIOUS cropping and zooming in Photoshop, there's no point in even messing around with 6MP Fine, and I defy anyone to find a difference between 6MP Fine and 6MP High. As a computer scientist, I know the only difference here is the image format--one is a TIFF (basically, a lossless format, essentially a bitmap) and the other is the same image stored as the highest quality JPEG. The JPEG standard was formulated as a lossy storage scheme in which, at its highest level of quality, the only information lost is that which is undetectable to the human eye. The only reason you'd even want to take images at 6MP High is if you want to dump the raw interpolated images to your computer and have some image processing program convert to some other non-JPEG format, like GIF or PNG...and even then it's perfectly fine to convert from the 6MP Fine JPEG format unless you demand only the most pure images.

Don't take my word for it though. Set up a still life and determine the perfect exposure settings. Then, shoot the exact same image at each and every quality setting the camera has (use ISO 160). Pull them into photoshop and focus on a highly detailed area of the image. Use Image Size to keep blowing the image up and up until you see quality break down in that finely detailed area. The moment your eye can see the image quality start to break down, make a note of how much you were able to blow up the image, then you'll see for yourself how ridiculously detailed 6MP Fine is, and you'll see there's no effective difference between 6MP High and 6MP Fine (especially since at 6MP, the image is interpolated from the super CCD anyway).

sev
sever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2002, 3:30 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

Sever, ...I did exactly what you said on my S602z, and found that the interpolated modes produce no improvement in edge detail/resolution over 3Mpix fine. So perhaps the interpolated 6 Mpix works in theory, but the lens isn't up to it!

If anybody is willing to post 2 enlarged areas of pics that prove it's better, then I'll see what I might be doing wrong! Is there nobody willing to rise to the challenge?
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2002, 7:28 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 58
Default

I don't know what you mean. I did this test and I was easily able to see a difference. All you have to do is pick a finely detailed part of an image that was shot with a tripod and the lowest ISO setting. Use oblique lighting to really bring out detail, and then just put the images side-by-side in photoshop and zoom.

If you don't see a marked difference, I would consider the possibility that your camera is malfunctioning and recording 6MP images as though you'd selected 3MP.

sev
sever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2002, 11:07 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

Voxmagna, you aren't the only one who can't see a difference. Any differences are minimal at best, and it's not onbvious that the 6MP files are the better ones. They may in some cases accentuate interpolation artifacts.

Sever, post your pics (or links) so we can see what you're referring to.
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2002, 12:38 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
dc9mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 179
Default 6mega pixel or not

If your printing photos up to 8.5 by 11 inch the 3mega pixel fine is the best. I did several tests with my Epson 780 printer and there slightly better at 3 mega pixel fine than 6 mega pixel tiff or JPG. They also look slightly better on the monitor too.

I have found when going to a 11 by 14 inch shot that i had printed at a profesional shop that your better off using 6 mega pixel to keep the pixels per inch high enough. Plus i used a way to sharpen the photo i learned from

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...rt_sharp.shtml

works well and gets the sharpness level I like from the 6 mega pixel photos.


Oh yea the original question about long time to save, well there TIFFS there about 17.9 megs each, thats huge, you wont get any camera to save those faster than about 20 to 30 seconds at that size. Get fast ram, i use Viking and memorex and i takes about 27 seconds to save a tiff. Always use nikel metal hydride, you just will waste a ton of money using alkalines.
dc9mm is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:42 AM.