3G Camera anomaly.

Hi, i just purchased an iPhone 3G, and so far im loving it. But today i was playing with the camera, and i noticed a tiny red dot on the screen. The strange thing thought, is that the dot doesn't show up in the photos. Like there's something wrong with the internal functions of the camera. The photos i uploaded are screen shots(hold+home button). This isn't a major concern for me, but it can be annoying at times, its sometimes more visible then other times. Would something like this be covered in warranty, in case it gets worse? Could someone explain what it is?
Screen Shots:
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y81/rammstein1012/IMG_0003.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y81/rammstein1012/IMG_0002.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y81/rammstein1012/IMG_0001.jpg
ps. im positive that its not dead/stuck pixels, as i only see the dot when using the camera.

Hey tyme1012,
Try covering the camera lens on the iPhone and taking a blank, black photo.
If you still see the red dot the iPhone may need hardware repair. Make a reservation to have a Genius at a local Apple retail store take a look at it or call AppleCare.
http://www.apple.com/retail/geniusbar/
U.S. iPhone technical support: 1-800-MY-IPHONE (1-800-694-7466)
-Jason

Similar Messages

New cards in the house!!

The fruits of my app spree have arrived! The Arrival+ came first on Friday, the Venture next on Saturday and today the Security Service FCU showed up. The card I was most excited to get was the SSFCU Power Travel Rewards WMC. The rewards are awesome with 3.3% cash on gas, travel & dining and it also comes with low APR, no fees of any kind (AF, BT, cash advance), and better than normal WMC benefits like 120 day price protection (I think most other cards give30 or 60 days). I was ecstatic to get it because it fits my spending perfectly but I must say...this is the cheapest feeling card I have ever seen! It's flimsy, the numbers are not raised and feel like they are spray painted on; and I'm certain they will get worn off in short order. Also, that row of white dots running down the middle of the card...that's not dust or some camera anomaly. When I peeled off the "call to activate" sticker it actually pulled off the paint or something! That said, this card will probably see more of my spend than any other because my two biggest categories are travel & dining. Combined with my Sallie Mae, I'll get 3.3-5% cash back on all of my biggest spend categories. This card also offers a photo option, I'll probably be doing that. I'm excited to get the Arrival+ as well. Before the nerf I had been planning to use it as a general spend card. The sign-on bonus is still great so I'll do that then see if they have any offers down the road to make it worth keeping. Otherwise, I could see converting it to a Ring or maybe merging the limit into my SM. The Venture is my 2nd. The $30k approval I got was a total shocker. I'll be combining my old Venture into my QS MC sometime before the AF hits, then seeing if I can make that a QS WMC. Overall, super happy with how my app spree went. I still have a Citi TY Premier under consideration. The nice woman I spoke with from the EO said she was going on vacation for a few days but would respond when she returns tomorrow. Final pending is with my local bank Fremont Bank. They run their card program through FNBO and I have to say, they are slow as hell. So far I've received one email from them saying they have my application and it is being reviewed. All these other cards have been delivered already and I didn't get any of them expedited. Slowwwwww.

NRB525 wrote:
happypill wrote:
The fruits of my app spree have arrived! The Arrival+ came first on Friday, the Venture next on Saturday and today the Security Service FCU showed up. The card I was most excited to get was the SSFCU Power Travel Rewards WMC. The rewards are awesome with 3.3% cash on gas, travel & dining and it also comes with low APR, no fees of any kind (AF, BT, cash advance), and better than normal WMC benefits like 120 day price protection (I think most other cards give30 or 60 days). I was ecstatic to get it because it fits my spending perfectly but I must say...this is the cheapest feeling card I have ever seen! It's flimsy, the numbers are not raised and feel like they are spray painted on; and I'm certain they will get worn off in short order. Also, that row of white dots running down the middle of the card...that's not dust or some camera anomaly. When I peeled off the "call to activate" sticker it actually pulled off the paint or something! That said, this card will probably see more of my spend than any other because my two biggest categories are travel & dining. Combined with my Sallie Mae, I'll get 3.3-5% cash back on all of my biggest spend categories. This card also offers a photo option, I'll probably be doing that. Congratulations on the cards!The 3.3% on the SSFCU sounds good, though it seems you get "full value" when you commit to a particular retailer with specific store gift cards, or similar promotions. For regular general gift cards, it seems to be less than 1c per point. For the "Bonus card" it's 1.87% to 2.5%, not bad, but my excitement about 3+ is dampened Yes, that is true. I browsed through the gift card partners prior to applying and decided I would have no trouble getting full value of 1c per point. I'm estimating I'll spend $4k per month on travel & dining, which would be just under $1,600 per year in rewards. I spend more than that annually at Best Buy, Lowes, Bass Pro, Cabelas, Macy's, Sephora (GF loves that place) and Mortons. It also includes Amazon which is my next biggest spend area after travel & dining, but I'd rather pay for those with SM or Amazon Store Card and get 5%. Now if you absolutely must have cash or cash equivalents, the return is up to 2.5% like you mentioned rather than 3.3%. I definitely value cash, but won't have to alter my spending at all to get full value with these partners so its fine for me. Another positive is if you go with the gift cards, you can get full value at just 2500 points for $25, where some other programs out there you need to get to 10,000 or even 25,000 points to get 1c per point in gift cards.

Camera Profiles - Anomaly

I run a dual boot system on two distinct hard disks. One runs Vista and the other runs Windows 7. Three weeks ago I downloaded LR 3 to my Vista drive.. After testing may of its new features as compared to LR 2.7, all was working well, including lens profiles.
Last week I installed LR 3 on the Window's 7 hard disk. Everything there is working fine with the exception of lens profiles. In The Windows 7 installation, Lightroom thinks my Canon 24-105 L series lens is a 135mm F2 L USM. In fact the same dng imported into each system reports differently. Thie interesting thing is that the dng I compared when I noticed the anomaly was originally edited in LR 2.7. All the 2.7 edits are there it is just the lens profile is incorrectly being reported. Further test shows this is true on all photos take with the 24-70 lens. My 70-200 reports correctly in both installations.
Can anyone tell me what is happening.
Jim

Hey Jim!
Just a thought, but it may be corruption on Windows rather than a LR 3 problem. Have you Run a disk check?
~~ MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A GOOD BACKUP FIRST !!! ~~
(Trust me, I've been stung by this, a simple problem with a program ends up crashing the machine unrecoverably!)
AFTER the backup -
1. Go to Start and click Computer
2. (I'm assuming C:, if you also store data on a separate drive, do both. BACKUP BOTH FIRST!) Find your main hard drive and RIGHT click it. Since this is Win 7 be sure to click the ICON, not the TEXT.
3. Choose Properties
4. At top, click the Tools Tab
5. Click the Check Now button. A windows opens, choose BOTH check boxes and tell it to Start
6. Another Window appears, this says it can't run while Windows is running and asks if you want to schedule a check, Choose YES.
7. Reboot and wait. It should start a normal boot, then switch to a black & white screen with a countdown timer - DON'T HIT ANY KEYS!
(that would cancel the check. The check could take 5 mins or 2 hours, depending on the size of your hard drive, number of files, speed of machine, etc.
8. When done, it should boot normally. When back up, uninstall and reinstall LR 3 again.
Personally, I'd re-download the file ( it may be corrupted) ~or~ check the CD {DVD??} for dust, smudges, etc BEFORE the reinstall.
Best of luck, hope this helps!
Bob M. aka PuterPro2

CS4 project to CS5 anomaly

Previous project was 1080 from a digital camera.
When I imported a previous CS4 PAL DV project into CS5, all the sequences were set to 1080 not DV.
I added a DV sequence, gave up and tried again. This time the sequences were DV as they should have been originally.
This suggests that there might be an anomaly sometimes when importing projects from CS4 to CS5 when they are of different types from the immediately previous work in CS5.
Working OK now, but posted so there is a record in case others have the same problem.

If I can repeat it, or others report the same issue, I'll certainly put in a bug report. But as of now it could easily be a one-off from a particular project.

Some Cameras Not Showing Up In Multi-Cam Master Sequence

I'm editing a music video with about 40 cam angles. They are all synched. They were all shot on the same three cameras and ingested together in preluder and converted to ProRes 422 (HQ) MOV files. They all show up in the sub-timeline and are turned on and viewable. They all play properly in the source monitor, they all play properly in the program monitor. But when I go into my master multicamera source sequence 10 of them wont select. They show up, but when I click them they wont switch. There is no apparent rhyme or reason why. Can anyone please offer some insite into this problem?
Working on CC that is updated. Original files were shot on Nikon DSLR 1280x720 H.264. No other programs running.

You could just do this manually and add those clips outside the MC cut. It doesn't explain the anomaly, but it will get the job done.

Bridge not recognizing internal camera memory

I've just transitioned my workflow back to a Mac environment (10.9.5) and have begun relying on Bridge CS6 to import my Canon Vixia HF20 AVCHD files directly from the camera. It works beautifully with anything saved to the SD card. However, Bridge won't recognize the camera's 32 GB internal memory. iMovie does, but I'd prefer to keep the video files in their native format. (I don't have Premiere.)
Any guesses as to the problem and if it's surmountable? I've really enjoyed the Bridge interface. (Much better than the Windows software Canon ships.) But those 32 GB contain my kids' toddlerhood, so I'd really like to back them up!! Thank you for your insight.
cheers,
Kristi

kjones8739 wrote:
I'm not sure if Bridge is using a Photoshop script. In Bridge, I choose File>Get photos from camera. I then use the Advanced Rename options to save the files according to date and time. Bridge will recognize an SD card if placed in the camera but will not recognize the internal camera drive (even absent a card).
Bridge imports the entire original file structure, which is partly why I like using it. But my searches show I'm probably an anomaly, as no one else seems to be running into this problem. (And Canon has a whole line of prosumer HD recorders with internal memory. They just ship with the world's most awful Windows software.)
That is exactly how you call the Photo Downloader script. :-/
sigh…
Bridge imports NOTHING. Its just a file browser, nothing more, nothing less. It's nothing more than the old Photoshop File Browser, renamed to accommodate the illusory, fabricated concept of the "suites". See below.
Photoshop opens nothing, edits nothing, saves nothing. Nothing is ever "imported" into Bridge.
Bridge just hands over the files to the appropriate application, whether that be Photoshop, ACR, Illustrator or even MS Word.
It does not keep its own libraries, it doesn't store images. It just shows you your files wherever you or other applications put them. That's why you think "imports the entire original file structure"; it's just showing you the original "structure", whatever you mean by that, pretty much as shown by Windows file Explorer or Apple's Finder.
It also can call on various scripts, such as the "Get Pictures From Camera" script.
Anyway, I come here to help users, not to debate uninformed posters.
I'm out of this thread, but not before saying that to me any and all Windows software is indeed "the world's most awful Windows software".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Inconsistency between or among applications in the artificial "suites" should come as no surprise.
The "suite" concept is a fabrication of Adobe marketing and bean-counting types. The engineering teams are totally independent of each other, they are not only in different buildings but in different cities and states of the American Union, even in different countries.
The fact that they have little if any communication among them is highlighted by requests occasionally made in these forums by top Adobe engineers to let the other teams know when there are problems in one application that impact our workflow in another one.

Camera Raw 4.4.1 has bug with Canon 40D raw files

I shoot with the Canon 20D, 30D, 40D, 1DMII, and the Rebel XTI. The Raw processor is showing an anomaly only with the 40D files. When I load raw images, and when the image is displayed, it is shown at one setting. Then in 3 seconds, its updated again at about 1/2 stop brighter. Each time I click on another image on the left column, same thing. The new image is displayed, then 3 seconds later, updated at about 1/2 stop brighter. THe histogram reflects the changes showing the data moving to the right. This only happens with the 40D raw files.
Whats up?
It happens regardless if "Auto" or "Default" is selected. I use "default" as a norm, never letting PS do an auto correction.
How do I stop Camera Raw from doing the second update? This has to stop.
...Doug

Thanks John,
Now moved to ACR -
http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.3bb6a85c.59b53a49

Acrobat X will not convert JPG from a cell phone camera to pdf.

One our PMs took some photos with his camera phone and Acrobat doesn't do anything when you try to convert the jpg to pdf. If we try to combine in Acrobat, the process starts, the Combine box opens and shows the files, but when you click on combine files Adobe pops a message saying that Adobe has stopped working and closes the program, searches the Internet for a solution, and finds, NOTHING. Which incedentally is what the seach finds in this forum, NOTHING, even if you search for Adobe.
So I call customer service, and for the first time in years, I'm told that the maintenance we purchased only covers installation. Seriously? I am now convinced, as is my corporate IT department, that Adobe is overpriced and under serviced. Not to mention the push to eliminate the individual products and force us to purchase expensive suites. Really?! Did you already forget about Microsoft's legal woes for bundling software?
I will never again purchase nor recommend Adobe products.
If someone else is having this problem, good luck.

Hi David, and thank for responding. We have volume licenses for an enterprise version of Acrobat Pro X. (See email below.) It was for 2 years of maintenance and included upgrades. As for the photos, we copied them from the camera to the desktop. We can print them to Adobe and I can convert them to bmp and then convert them to pdf. However, I cannot convert the jpg to pdf directly. Adobe stops running and Windows closes the program. I can successfully convert other jpg photos though. This is the case on two different PCs. We run Windows 7x64. I don't know what is different with the jpg from the Samsung 350 Windows phones that causes this anomaly. Any ideas would be welcomed. Thanks!
Brian
From: Ali Emami [removed by moderator]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 11:30 AM
To: Brian Baldwin
Cc: Kitt Penn
Subject: RE: Adobe's Volume Licensing Program
Good morning Brian:
It was pleasure speaking with you. . Thanks for your valued request. I called Zones and I talked to Kitt Penn 253-205-3867 who will be happy to assist you with a price for:
39 seats 2 years Upgrade plan for Acrobat 9 Pro
Thanks and wish you a very happy day,
ALI
Ali Emami
Adobe Systems Incorporated
CLP Core Business Team-Western Region
1-800-846-2481 Ext 7425
[removed by moderator]
Brian Baldwin, PM
Project Coordinator
Schuff Steel - Phoenix, AZ
PL: 602 452-4420
Fax: 602 251-0325
[removed by moderator]
web: www.schuff.com

Brown splotches on image in Lightroom but not Camera RAW?

I'm using Lightroom 4.1 and Photoshop Camera RAW from CS5 version 6.6
In Lightroom I'm getting some brown splotches on the faces of the groomsmen to the right. These splotches while less noticeable also appear on the bride and groom.
Process the same RAW file in Camera RAW and there are no brown splotches anywhere on the photos.
Any thoughts on how I can get rid of this anomaly in Lightroom?
See attached photo. Lightroom file on top and camera raw file on the bottom.

That catches most at some time!!!

After installing Snow Leopard on MacPro with 23" HD monitor I have noticed an anomaly when scrolling up or down, a horizontal ripple appears briefly, I have tested other browsers and there is no problem, only in FF 8. What is causing this?

After installing Snow Leopard on MacPro with 23" HD monitor I have noticed an anomaly when scrolling up or down, a horizontal ripple appears briefly, I have tested other browsers and there is no problem, only in FF 8. What is causing this?

Hi applecore_eater,
When Leopard came out, machines were shipping with Tiger for 3-5 months after it's release. So the fact that you bought a machine with Leopard still installed is not uncommon, especially considering we're not even a month into release. Matter of fact, I'd be surprised to see a lot of machines (unless CTO) that are coming with Snow Leopard.
The battery issue is not specific to Snow Leopard or the MacBook Air. I've deployed SL to about 15-20 MacBook Airs and all of them have been perfectly fine (batteries).

Very anomalous Photoshop anomaly!

Several people have incorrectly attempted to explain the Photoshop anomaly shown below as a regular "orb," an "accidental application of the brush," "background noise," etc. Everybody's missing the mark, simply because they're not addressing the very specific nature of the anomaly in question.
So... I'm approaching my private little investigation with a different strategy this time; it goes like this:
- PLEASE LOOK AT THE PHOTOSHOP IMAGE SHOWN BELOW. IT HAPPENED ACCIDENTALLY, WHILE A CAMERA-RAW FILE GOT SAVED AS A TIFF. AFTER THAT, IT LAID INVISIBLE TO THE EYE AND SHOWED UP WHEN A 12x EXPOSURE INCREASE WAS APPLIED TO THE AREA CONTAINING THE OBJECT.
- CAN YOU RECREATE THIS IMAGE, OR AN IMAGE VERY SIMILAR TO THIS ONE (WITHOUT COPYING AND PASTING)? IF SO, CAN YOU SHOW YOUR VERSION OF IT HERE, WITH ADEQUATE LEVEL OF DETAIL, AND SAY HOW YOU DID IT? Please don't show just any smudgy, bright, round thing, that won't do.
Thank you,
Juan

Why are you ignoring the obvious questions?
The moon is missing, not to mention the hot pixels. Who was painting or doing sky replacement up there, and how?
And could they/you not have accidentally brushed dark gray or gotten the "anomaly" from somewhere else before you stretched the image levels radically?
When you work with 8 bit data, then stretch levels as much as you did, you can expect strange results, such as posterization interacting with huge changes in exposure.
Speaking of which, you should work in 16 bits/channel. You'd get better results.
I'd bet real money that you or whomever was editing the image accidentally caused this problem simply by misplacing a mouse click or pen operation on a tablet. I've reproduced results that look enough like it to satisfy myself on that score.
-Noel

Adjustable/Non-adjustable Pro Mouse. Which came first?

Hi all. We have a 17" FP 1GHz, bought in the UK late 2003, which came with the adjustable Pro-mouse - the one with the 3 position ring around the IR. This had become more and more unresponsive and we were lucky to acquire a brand new one on eBay from a German seller. This does not have the ring around the IR.
Purely out of interest, which is the newer design?
Many thanks in advance,
Adrian
(Neither are 'Magic'. - 'Er indoors tried one and doesn't like it. I now use it with my iBook.)

Hi again. They are both M5769. Interestingly the original, as supplied with the iMac, says 'Pro Mouse' on the back between the Apple symbol and the adjuster ring; as does the picture on the link you kindly provided Also 'Assembled in Malaysia'
The recent eBay purchase just says 'Mouse' and is assembled in China.
Curioser and curioser…
Adrian
Edit: A further anomaly. The original's side grips are just shapes in the clear case, those of the new are white plastic inserts.
Should I be getting out more? :-D
Message was edited by Adrian
Edit II, In my OP, substitute 'Magic' for 'Mighty'. WTH did that come from?
Message was edited by Adrian

IPhone camera roll "? Misc" photo, cannot delete it.

For about 3 weeks I have had this grey icon that says "? Misc" appearing in my yet-to-be-synced camera roll on my phone. I finally got sick of it, and restored my phone from a backup and now it is still there.
When I sync, it downloads and deletes all the photos on the cameral roll, except this anomaly. I have no clue how to get rid of this... help please?

Just want to chime in and say that you're not alone. I'm having the same issue exactly. In my case, it began the day I upgraded from iOS 4.1 to 4.2.1, but I'm not sure that had anything to do with it. I sync with iPhoto, tell it to delete all photos from the phone after the import, and then find this solitary grey icon in my camera roll, which contains a question mark over the word "Misc". Nothing happens if I tap the icon. If I shoot more photos, they appear in camera roll next to the grey icon. If I import them to iPhoto and delete, the grey one is still there. Sound familiar?

Bad pixels in the camera sensor

I've got an iPhone 4S, 64GB (Verizon) and noticed a few bad pixels during video playback on our 42" TV (played back via the HDMI adapter). It's something that most people would not notice, including my wife as she watched the video with me, but I'm a long time video/photo enthusiast and imperfections like that stand out to me like a pimple on an otherwise perfect looking face.
After several test videos and even photos, I am able to reproduce this pixel anomaly each and every time. There are 3 pixels, just slightly to the left of the center, that show up incorrectly in kind of an obtuse triangular formation. Two of them favor white, the third is dark. It's not something that is noticeable on the iPhone 4S screen because not all of the pixels are shown, but on a monitor that can render *all* pixels of 1080 HD video playback they show up.
I'm certain it's not dust as I've inspected and gently cleaned the camera window, not to mention even a small spec of dust would not show up as a single pixel (or in this case, what appears to be two pixels right on top of each other for each of the problem pixels). The anomaly shows up when lighter colors/gradients are present in that region of the screen. Darker colors do not reveal the bad pixels. Just to be clear - it's NOT a screen display issue - the pixels are noticeable on our 42" TV during playback, and also on my Mac monitor and iPad screen (ONLY when zoomed in viewing on my iPad, which is possible during playback of video using the stock photo app). The bad pixels jump around a bit because of the digital image stabilization (that should make sense to the more hard core video enthusiasts), which further supports it is a capture issue, not a video coding problem or anything like that. The issue is either with the image sensor itself, or the hardware's processing there of.
My question - has anyone else observed similar behavior? If so, is there something you're aware that can be done to correct it? This is my second iPhone 4S, the first being a perfectly-functioning 32 GB model (which did not have this issue) that I returned in favor of a 64 GB model because I was burning through space too quickly.
I'm probably going to have to go back and try to explain this to the good folks at the local Apple Store, and try to get a replacement unit, but I'm not looking forward to having to show video samples and point out three teeny little dots that most people won't even notice, but drive me crazy (especially after dropping $400 plus tax and a two-year commitment). A huge selling point of my iPhone 4S was of course, its superior photo and video capabilities. I understand they're not pro quality, but there shouldn't be any consistent pixel issues like this going on.
Sorry for the long post, but I'd appreciate some feedback, suggestions, input. Thanks.

pogster wrote:
The problem with this type of communication is what you are describing and what I think you are describing can sometimes be different so my apologiies in that regard.
No worries. I agree - text-only communication can be a rather clunky experience in trying to convey complex issues without any visual or (2-way live) verbal means. I was a bit worried about being too wordy in an already wordy post and feared that it might just be ignored if it was too long. Again - I appreciate your chiming in. You seem very knowledgable in digital photography, which is exactly what I was hoping to find.
Given that my description of "bad pixels" is a bit sloppy for what is really going on, I think you understand what I mean in my usage of those words.
To answer your question, the offending pixels, or very, very small little dots of imperfections, are present in both video playback and in still photos. After shooting several test videos against neutral and textured backgrounds to see what kind of results I'd get in the appearance of the bad pixels, I also took several stills in "burst mode" using an app called "Camera-" against a wood grain background, as the woodgrain background offered the most visible and consistent view of the blemishes. In motion video, the dots (bad pixels) are pretty easy to see on a large display, or when zoomed in during playback on my iPad 2's screen. In stills, it was kind of tricky to identify them, because without the persistent motion of the background, the bad pixels almost blended in as random image noise. I was however, able to identity with certainty the same bad pixels in most of the stills. Additionally, at the higher resolution of the stills, the offending pixels almost don't even need masking or removal with photo editing software. Like I said - without the constant visible background motion to make them stand out as irregularities, or the ability to do a frame-by-frame analysis (which I can do easier with the video file using an app called VideoPix), the bad pixels are more difficult to identify.
The importance in identifying the bad pixels in stills, even though they are practically not noticeable, is that it can now be determined that the bad pixels are not the result of some kind of video coding glitch, but rather present in the hardware of the device itself - either as a defective image sensor, or defective hardware that translates the data from the image sensor into the pixels utilized by the software for photos and video.
As part of the tests I ran, I captured video with an app called KingCamera, and it, too, produced the same results. KingCamera also has an option for "locking" of the auto white balance and brightness, loosely similar to setting those manually on a higher-end, dedicated camera. Even locking the white balance and brightness, the pad pixels were present, so the potential for the issue being caused by an anomaly in the software's auto-settings management were put to rest.
In regard to being able to correct the bad pixels in stills - yep, easily done. BUT, I shouldn't need to. In terms of correcting them during video playback, that *is* actually something I could probably work out a method of doing. I used to dable in production videos that involved complex imaging filters, multiple composite video layers, and automated ways of identifying specific colors, contrast points, and patterns within images/video streams and altering them (such as cleaning up sloppy image mattes or locking in on visual patterns for the application of various video effects). Again, this is something I *shouldn't* need to do.
The still photo and video capabilities on the iPhone 4S are outstanding, in contrast to what other similar existing devices offer (arguably better than or almost as good as the best competitor offerings, depending), but the quality is not DSLR, and like I said - I'm not expecting it to be. I do expect however, and I don't think it is unreasonable to, image rendering without persistent "bad pixels" showing - even if I am only in the 1% of people who are likely to notice such image defects. They are, in fact, defects, and not "normal operation for a device of this caliber".
I was hoping there might be some trick to correct them, but I kind of figured there would not be. It seemed smart to at least reach out and see what other people may know that I might be missing. Again, I regret terribly my poor decision to return my perfectly-functioning 32 GB iPhone 4s for the 64 GB model. Knowing a little about the very intricate technologies that make these things seem "magical", I understand that there are dozens or even hundreds of very complex little components that are mostly stamped out on an assembly line of robot fabrication means, then assembled, at least in part, by humans in a factory who are required to pump out x number of these things in short periods of time. I worried about the possibility of trading in my perfectly functional device for something that may be just a tad less perfect - just because of the odds. My bad for not following my natural instincts on this one. I just didn't want to have to constantly be managing space on my device. I failed to think through my initial choice of the 32 GB model in regard to my trigger-happy photo/video nature. The cumulative files are much larger on this device than I was initially expecting (because I was just too excited to get my hands on one on October 14 and failed to do enough research and calculations). Days into owning my 32 GB 4S, I was already spending time, almost daily, re-rendering videos at 720 and 580 through iMovie, being somewhat irritated about having to replace the original videos with reduced resolution versions just to keep the videos live on my iPhone (sometimes archiving the originals on my Mac first). Anyway - enough of my rambling.
Thank you again for your input, pogster. If you have any other ideas, please share. I'm pretty sure I know what I have to do to feel happy with my investment, though. I'm just not looking forward to complaining about 3 bad pixels to a Genius Bar employee who's probably going to look at me like I'm one of those "never happy with..." people. Three bad pixels that I won't even be able to show ON the actual iPhone itself, but rather bring my iPad 2 and show zoomed-in playback of the video footage.
Message was edited by: ascii-T - fixed type-o

Problem with threads and camera.

Hi everybody!
I've a problem with taking snapshot.
I would like to display a loading screen after it take snapshot ( sometimes i
have to wait few seconds after i took snapshot. Propably photo is being taken in time where i have to wait).
I was trying to use threads but i didn't succeed.
I made this code:
display.setCurrent(perform);
        new Thread(new Runnable(){
            public void run() {
                while((!performing.isShown()) && (backgroundCamera.isShown())){
                    Thread.yield();
                notifyAll();
        }).start();
        new Thread(new Runnable(){
            public void run() {
                try {
                    this.wait();
                } catch(Exception e) {
                    exceptionHandler(e);
                photo = camera.snapshot();
                display.setCurrent(displayPhoto);
        }).start();This code is sometimes showing performing screen but sometimes no.
I don't know why. In my opinion performing.isShown() method isn't working correctly.
Does anyone have some idea how to use threads here?

Hi,
I've finally managed to work this fine.
The code:
       Object o = new Object();
       display.setCurrent(perform);
        new Thread(new Runnable(){
            public void run() {
                while(!performing.isShown()){
                    Thread.yield();
               synchronized(o) {
                  o.notify();
        }).start();
        new Thread(new Runnable(){
            public void run() {
                try {
                    synchronized(o) {
                       o.wait(1);
                } catch(Exception e) {
                    exceptionHandler(e);
                photo = camera.snapshot();
                display.setCurrent(displayPhoto);
        }).start();

3G Camera anomaly.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for