Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Kodak

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 5, 2005, 2:00 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 81
Default

Hi, everyone here! I'm a new member and a newbie in digital photo. Can anyone tell me what can be improved when firmware update is available for a camera? I have problems with a noticible red cast on indoor pics, even without electrical lights on and with auto white balance. As well I get dark pictures of indoor shots in low light conditions. This is because I discovered, that the Shutter speed in all Auto modes is limited to 1/8 sec, when in fact it needs to be longer. Can these flaws been solved if Firmware update comes out?

Thanks to every response!
Marinjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 5, 2005, 7:21 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
DGehman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 319
Default

I'm pretty sure a firmware update is a take-it-or-leave-it situation -- Kodak would decide what to include.

If you (and thousands of others) mention the need for longer exposure in Auto, there is a slight chance Kodak would add this.

More likely, Kodak would suggest using S mode, rather than Auto.

In any case,I remember reading in a photo guide in my late teens, when cameras contained gerbils that carved scenes onto soft rock when the shutter-whip snapped, that 1/8 second is the longest shutter interval a person could possibly accomplish without a tripod. I've never achieved it. And the guide was almost certainly by Kodak.

Dave
DGehman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 5, 2005, 12:37 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

Try the manual functions on your camera. I know we owners of the DX6490's have been hopefully awaiting a firmware update for our cameras without any results and it is likely that the same may be true for the 7440. My daughter bought a 7440 after seeing the pictures I was sending her and had a simular complaint. I told her to experiment with the manual modes. She did and reported better results.

Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 5, 2005, 2:59 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 81
Default

Thanks for paying attention to my post. Of coarese, I can solve the Exposure problems using Manual Mode instead of Auto modes, although it's an accountable wish to expect nearly the same results in Auto modes. That's why Auto is for. But I can't escape the colour cast- White balance Manual modes doesn't solve this. For example when shooting indoors with flash (in Flash Auto) You can use either Auto WB or Daylight, but the result is the same. Other WB choices are not usable with Flash.

I will put a sample picture shot indoors with no other light, than daylight through windows. The walls should look pure grey, but they are...
Attached Images
 
Marinjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2005, 1:33 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

They look grey to me with just a little tinge of purple, and show some lighter ,and some more shadowed areas. Quite normal realy. I put the photo into photoshop Elements and hit auto enhance and got this result.....
Attached Images
 
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2005, 1:42 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

Not being able to see the room for myself I can't really tell if there is a color shift and if there is, then what the problem is. I take your word for it though and must say that sometimes the results can be a function of the monitor that you are viewing them on. This was a problem for one of my daughters that was useing an old Packerd Bell computer, she kept saying that some of the photos were a slight green tinted. When viewed on my computer they were as close to the original colors as they could be> May not be the problem with yours, but the one photo you showed would be a keeper to me!

Big Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2005, 3:02 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 81
Default

Thanks for advice, but that's not the case. I have the possibility to watch my photos on many different monitors- at home, on my sisters PC, at work . All of the monitors are good, mine is a perfect Compaq S910 19". and the picture is everywhere the same. Regarding the removing the tinge in Photoshop I have one question: by saving your photos after editing in .jpg You actually have compressed the source twice- first by Your camera and secondly by Photoshop. I do it so, when forced, but isn,t it a bad thing to compress twice? One solution is to save to .tif after editing, but then there are soft like Canon Easy Print which doesn't show .tif photos. Easy Print gives me some great advantages in printing with my Canon i455, like printing 4 4x6 pics on a single A4.

I put 2 more pics for comparison- the same room and face. The picture taken with my previous "cheap" Medion MD9653 has 100% the colour as when I look at the waall.
Attached Images
 
Marinjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2005, 3:03 AM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 81
Default

And here is the same action taken with DX7440
Attached Images
 
Marinjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2005, 6:25 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
DGehman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 319
Default

There are a few references across reviews of Kodak cameras that mention Kodak's tendency to "warm up" scenes. My previous camera, a Fujifilm, tended to cool down scenes. Kodak makes people look better -- Fuji's approach makes landscapes,especially sky and trees,look better.

Perfect color match even with the best of films, if you remember that quaint medium, pretty much always involved fine tuning during printing. Onmy very few assignments whereanything like true color was important, the lab asked me to take several bracketed shots of a standard gray card at the beginning and end ofeach roll. The lab then adjusted white balance (gray balance?) to that standard.

And, yes, JPEGging a JPEG is lossy compression on top of lossy compression. But in most of my photos, I can't find much difference between the original and the edited version,if the second JPEG level is set to80 or higher.I've never found any difference at 92 or higher, except that the file size often grows larger.
DGehman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2005, 6:53 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 81
Default

Yes, I agree that I too can't see much difference when saving from editor in the best .jpg quality. But once again about true colour representation- why could my previous camera Medion MD9653 produce 100% true to original colours. I have the possibility to look at the wallpaper colour of 2 of my rooms in my monitor and then to the wall. With Medion it's 100% OK. So, there are I hope not only 1 camera that produce true match of coloursunder simple lighting conditions. But I love my Kodak DX7440 and wish it could do so as well.........
Marinjo 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 3:09 AM.