Camera Blur Gone - Simple Fix

[mikey1234]

Originally Posted by Unknown Zone

You cannot change the MP of the camera without phyical changing out the some hardware if your camera has a limit of 3.2M and you want it to capture 5M.....the ISO the article is stating is the speed that the shutter is taking the picture..ie faster fps less blur and so on.....which has nothing to do with uping the MP of the camera.


What you are referring to is the "Panoramic Photo" hack in the article.
It Quotes:
"By default the Fuze is set to an astonishing .67mp and with a simple cab file it goes up to 6.92mp. I just tested it out and my sample photo went from 85.5k to 799.2k in size which is the right direction "

HKLM/Software/HTC/Camera/P3
Adjust MainCamCaptSize to 1024 and MainCamSupportCaptSize to 1744

oh. i was thinking that maybe the hardware was there, but it was just throttled, like my internet connection

[bugsy90]

Here's a start at a consoldiated cab - I just need to add the brightness levels as default which I should have done shortly but you cna just do it manually anyway since that can be done without a registry editor. This cab contains the tweaks to remove the camera delay (from focused to taking the photo), enabling sport and burst modes, allowing for 7.2mp panoramic photos and disabling the shutter sound.
These are the value changes:
-HKLM\Software\HTC\Camera\Captparam
CapKeyDelayTime" value="0" datatype="integer
CaptureTimer" value="0" datatype="integer
EnableCapKeyDelay" value="0" datatype="integer
DisableShutterSound" value="0" datatype="integer

HKLM\Software\HTC\Camera\P6
Enable" value="1" datatype="integer

HKLM\Software\HTC\Camera\P8
Enable" value="1" datatype="integer

HKLM\Software\HTC\Camera\P3
MainCamCaptSize" value="1024" datatype="integer
MainCamSupportCaptSize" value="1744" datatype="integer

If anyone tests it please provide feedback. Thank you

[Dr.8820]

i'll test it and post back...

[dr g]

All this tweak does is (duh) underexpose the image by shortening the shutter speed. Basic photography but at the end you get an underexposed image. This is NOT the same as an ISO boost.

Now if you do a 'ghetto ISO boost' and raise the image levels with an editing program, then you have something truly similar, but that is another processing step (rather unweildy even on the TP).

Bottom line is you don't get something for nothing. But hey if you can live with underexposed images ...

[ou2mame]

the camera kinda sucks. lowering the brightness may limit the blur, but thats only because there's less actual data in the picture. long story short, the lens on our camera is way too small for the mp. at wide open, its still limited in light. the flash isn't a flash, and the camera sensor is probably less sensitive than a disposable digital camera. literally. all this does is limit the actual data in the picture. the reason why the fps rises as a result of limiting the amount of data in the picture is preceicely that. the sensor can obviously only see a certain amount of data at its current lens opening, and limiting that raises the fps because there's less actual data in the picture. its like doing a benchmark of quake 3 in a dark room, compared to a room with action going on in it. of course the fps will be higher in the dark room, because there is nothing to slow it down. you could get 10000000fps if you walk yourself into a dark corner, but as soon as you turn around and watch the rocket fly towards you, the fps will drop to 10fps due to the fire and the glare on the surroundings that it provides.

[dr g]

Originally Posted by ou2mame

the camera kinda sucks. lowering the brightness may limit the blur, but thats only because there's less actual data in the picture. long story short, the lens on our camera is way too small for the mp. at wide open, its still limited in light. the flash isn't a flash, and the camera sensor is probably less sensitive than a disposable digital camera. literally. all this does is limit the actual data in the picture. the reason why the fps rises as a result of limiting the amount of data in the picture is preceicely that. the sensor can obviously only see a certain amount of data at its current lens opening, and limiting that raises the fps because there's less actual data in the picture. its like doing a benchmark of quake 3 in a dark room, compared to a room with action going on in it. of course the fps will be higher in the dark room, because there is nothing to slow it down. you could get 10000000fps if you walk yourself into a dark corner, but as soon as you turn around and watch the rocket fly towards you, the fps will drop to 10fps due to the fire and the glare on the surroundings that it provides.

Sorry but that's not correct and not a good analogy. It is simply a matter of a shorter shutter speed. While indeed you may lose some image data (i.e. tonality) because of the underexposure, the sensor is sending the same amount of information to the signal processors; a black pixel needs to be processed, just the same as one of any other color.

In a 3d rendered environment, the hardware is actually generating the image, so that is a different situation entirely; a camera captures an existing scene.

[gimme5]

I didn't realize this was a fix, it's just in the settings. I lowered that setting on my TP very soon after trying the camera for the first time. Like with everything, I play with the settings.

For God's sake, guys, play with the settings!!!

[bugsy90]

There is no camera that never has a blur...under normal settings and even dim settings the Touch Pro can take photos without a blur though...that's all this is about - optimizing a setting that some people did not realize had such a big impact while seemingly such a small setting (it sounds like it would have a similar impact as saturation but really goes beyond that). Take a $1000 SLR and you can still get a blurry photo - the point is in routine settings there's no blur.

[bugsy90]

Originally Posted by chronster

That's what this thread is about? Really? Because by your title you make it sound as though this thread is about eliminating the blur entirely.

Seriously, 39 thanks for telling someone about a setting that everyone found right away? LMFAO. I'm not being sour at you bugsy, it's just hilarious is all.

Hey, in case anyone has a problem with their volume, I found a solution:
http://forum.ppcgeeks.com/showthread...920#post764920

The blur is gone under normal conditions - I doubt anyone with half a brain thought that there is anything to eliminate the blur of a ANY camera in ALL circumstances.
Not sure what your fixation with the number of 'thanks' is...'Thanks' is monopoly money. I was just sharing some info that was novel to myself and clearly some other people...

[gimme5]

Originally Posted by bugsy90

The blur is gone under normal conditions - I doubt anyone with half a brain thought that there is anything to eliminate the blur of a ANY camera in ALL circumstances.
Not sure what your fixation with the number of 'thanks' is...'Thanks' is monopoly money. I was just sharing some info that was novel to myself and clearly some other people...

And that's great. Obviously some people didn't know that setting improved the clarity of the pictures. The only real complaint is your title. First, it's not a "fix". Second, it doesn't remove the blur completely, it just makes the pictures better. Users who didn't know about this won't care, because they can take better pictures now. But those of us who already altered this setting on day one probably expected more.

I saw your title, clicked on the link, hoping to maybe get better pics by trying some new tweak...and my next thought was "what the...???".

If your title had been something like "Simple settings change to get better pics", nobody would have a problem with it. Anyway, no big deal, really