Webcam image quality

Hi,
I am currently developing a video chat component for android using lccs, however, due to slow internet connectivity in my area, the webcam published is usually very laggy.
<rtc:WebCamera top="10" left="10" bottom="10" right="10" imageQuality=""/>
By just setting the imageQuality property of the WebCamera, will I be able to overcome the problem?And more importantly, what string value i can put to control the imageQuality property, is it high/low?I couldnt find the proper string value to key in, thx in advance for any advice.
Regards

Hi,
Thx for the advice, I've actually tried setting the imageQuality in the WebCamera component,but everytime i try to run the AIR application, it will crash, if i take out the imageQuality property,everything works normally, I am building an AIR application, imageQuality is just a property of the WebCamera right? I am not sure what went wrong, please advice. Thank you.
Below is the full coding:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
   xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
   xmlns:mx="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/mx" xmlns:rtc="http://ns.adobe.com/rtc" currentState="logon" fontSize="28">
<fx:Script>
[Bindable] private var roomURL:String = "https://collaboration.adobelivecycle.com/yytan1987/myfirstroom";
protected function connect():void {
auth.userName = userName.text;
currentState = "default";
session.login();
</fx:Script>
<s:states>
<s:State name="default"/>
<s:State name="logon"/>
</s:states>
<fx:Declarations>
<rtc:AdobeHSAuthenticator id="auth" protocol="rtmfp"/>
</fx:Declarations>
<s:TextInput id="userName" includeIn="logon" top="200" horizontalCenter="0"/>
<s:Button label="Connect" click="connect()" includeIn="logon" top="250" horizontalCenter="0" height="50" width="150"/>
<rtc:ConnectSessionContainer id="session" roomURL="{roomURL}" authenticator="{auth}" autoLogin="false" width="100%" height="100%" includeIn="default">
<rtc:WebCamera top="10" left="10" bottom="10" right="10" imageQuality="high_q" />
<rtc:AudioPublisher id="audioPub"  codec="{SoundCodec.SPEEX}" useEchoSuppression="true"/>
<rtc:AudioSubscriber/>
<mx:Button label="Audio" toggle="true" id="audioButt"
   click="(audioButt.selected) ? audioPub.publish(): audioPub.stop()"/>
<mx:Button x="103" y="0" label="Quality" toggle="true" id="audioButt1"
   click="(audioButt.selected) ? audioPub.microphoneManager.encodeQuality = 4 : audioPub.microphoneManager.encodeQuality = 6"/>
</rtc:ConnectSessionContainer>
</s:Application>
Regards,
Tan

Similar Messages

  • Poor webcam image quality (HP Touchsmart Notebook

     I recieved a HP touchsmart Notebook as a Christmas gift and the image quality is  horrible! Even in a well lit environment, the image is still not clear. I have adjusted the settings to try to improve the image quality, but there is still not much of a difference in the way the images appear. I have also tried to reinstall the Cyberlink YouCam application but the image quality is still the same (poor). I like some features on my laptop, yet I'm still getting aquainted with it. However, the image quality along with a few other technical issues such as (freezes), has negatively impacted how I view this product. I hope that there is something that could be done! Please help!

    Hi @mzdymond01 
    Thank You for the inquiry, I will do my best to assist you!
    I understand you received this notebook at Christmas and image quality of the WebCam is poor.
    Have you done all your Windows updates?
    Have you tried Using automated troubleshooting (Windows 8)?
    Have you ran the HP Support Assistant to assist with HP updates?
    Here is a link to Webcam Troubleshooting (Windows 8) that will guide you through some steps.
    If the issue should remain I suggest contacting HP support for further assistance. As this is a new product you want to ensure everything is performing as it should.
    Please call our technical support at 800 474 6836. If you live outside the US/Canada Region, please click the link below to get a support number for your region.
    World Wide Phone Support
    Best of Luck!
    Sparkles1
    I work on behalf of HP
    Please click “Accept as Solution ” if you feel my post solved your issue, it will help others find the solution.
    Click the “Kudos, Thumbs Up" on the bottom right to say “Thanks” for helping!

  • DV7-3079wm webcam image quality poor

    I've had this laptop almost 2 yrs, but never used the webcam until recently.  My nephew wanted me to sign up for Sykpe.  Anyway even using the HP MediaSmart software, the webacm image is washed out and blurry.  I can take the laptop outsife on battery and try to take snap shots. The image have too much contrast and out of focus.
    Is this a software or hardware issue?
    I had pruchased a 2 yr extended warrantee and sent it to Warranty Logistics, but they found 'nothing wrong.'  Needless to say I won't be buying extended warrantees again.

    Hi @mzdymond01 
    Thank You for the inquiry, I will do my best to assist you!
    I understand you received this notebook at Christmas and image quality of the WebCam is poor.
    Have you done all your Windows updates?
    Have you tried Using automated troubleshooting (Windows 8)?
    Have you ran the HP Support Assistant to assist with HP updates?
    Here is a link to Webcam Troubleshooting (Windows 8) that will guide you through some steps.
    If the issue should remain I suggest contacting HP support for further assistance. As this is a new product you want to ensure everything is performing as it should.
    Please call our technical support at 800 474 6836. If you live outside the US/Canada Region, please click the link below to get a support number for your region.
    World Wide Phone Support
    Best of Luck!
    Sparkles1
    I work on behalf of HP
    Please click “Accept as Solution ” if you feel my post solved your issue, it will help others find the solution.
    Click the “Kudos, Thumbs Up" on the bottom right to say “Thanks” for helping!

  • Webcam low quality image

    I am very new to Flash and I am creating a basic webcam display right now and the image quality of the webcam is very low how can I fix this? My code is:
    var camera:Camera = Camera.getCamera();
    var video:Video = new Video();
    webCam.attachCamera(camera);

    check this property
    http://www.adobe.com/livedocs/flash/9.0/ActionScriptLangRefV3/flash/media/Camera.html#setQ uality()
    pass bandWidth = 0 and quality=100 for the best quality for the Camera.
    var cam:Camera = new Camera();
    cam.setQuality(0,100);
    Hope this helps
    Karthik

  • Ideapad U530 camera has terrible image quality

    I purchased an IdeaPad U530 touch a few weeks ago and have found the webcam image is terrible.  I am not talking a little dark or a little grainy, I am talking absolutely terrible.  Very blotchy.  It almost looks like it is below 640x480, way below.   Lighting doesn't help.  The computer has Windows 8.1 and there are no settings that I can find anywhere to make any adjustments to the camera image.  They took out the advanced settings in W8.1 camera so I am stuck.   Are there any settings that I can do to fix this?  As it is, the camera is unusable because the image is so bad.  I have looked online high and low to find a solution and I can't find any way to fix it other than buying a USB camera and ignoring the webcam that I paid for when I bought the computer.

    I also have a U530 touch with windows 8.1 and the camera is very grainy running the standard camera app.  I've tried uninstalling, reinstalling the camera driver but no change.  I did notice however that the smaller cam preview in skype seems fine and sharp.  
    Pictures taken with the camera app in windows is grainy but the picture size is 1280x720.  So it is taking pictures as the proper resolution but the quality is unacceptable.  

  • Satellite S70-A-11H web camera image quality is not good

    Hi,
    Running windows 8.1 which came with the laptop.
    New out of the box.
    As per title.
    I find the image quality of the camera image to be very grainy, poor color etc.
    When I start the web camera using the search bar on the right, it starts using the Microsoft application, when you scroll down to settings all that is available under settings/options is Photo aspect ratio, Grid lines, Location info.
    I have been in touch with Toshiba Tech support who advised to do a Laptop refresh, which I did.
    This made no difference.
    After which they asked me to find the Toshiba web camera application on the laptop, this should have been in the Program Files folder in the Toshiba folder.
    This application does not exist on my laptop.
    The tech checked the same model laptop that he had available, which I was told when he selected the web camera, it opened using the Toshiba Web camera application, not Microsoft.
    I have looked at other Toshiba laptops with web cameras, and found the image quality to be better. Unable to get to settings as these laptops were on display and in demo mode, hence locked down to some extent.
    I can't believe that a web camera in this day and age for this value of laptop to have such poor image quality. My digital camera from 10year ago has better image quality.
    I have checked through the laptop, and I do not have this application installed.
    I have checked for updated drivers and software for my laptop, and cannot find this application to be applicable for my laptop. Drivers etc appear to be up to date.
    I would like to know, do other users of this S series have any issue of camera image quality.
    When the camera is selected what application is being used, Toshiba or Microsoft.
    Is Toshiba web camera application applicable to Windows 8.1, as I cannot see it listed for 8.1
    Does this sound like a hardware fault or a application/software issue.
    Any direction or help on this matter would be appreciated, as I am getting to the point of returning this laptop for a refund.
    Thanks in advance.
    D.
    Yes, I have tried using the FORCE!

    > The tech checked the same model laptop that he had available, which I was told when he selected the web camera, it opened using the Toshiba Web camera application, not Microsoft.
    The Toshiba webcam application is available for Win 7 system but the Win 8 and Windows 8.1 system use the own Microsoft webcam application.
    > I have looked at other Toshiba laptops with web cameras, and found the image quality to be better.
    Different Toshiba notebooks are equipped with different webcams.
    Satellite S70-A-11H was equipped with a *0.92 mega pixel webcam*
    A Satellite A660 for example was equipped with an _1.3M mega pixel webcam_
    So there is a difference in webcam resolution

  • Best option for Webcam for quality video

    I'm looking to put together a few short movies for my family. It's a bucket list thing so I've got a Mac mini &amp; I'm trying to work out the best webcam to buy. I was about to buy the C920 but then realised the limited capability. I also have all the adobe movie editing stuff, which I need to get my head-round.
    I do have a budget for something like the C920. I'm really after the best image quality along with autofocus.
    Once I've done, the mini will go into the lounge &amp; we'll be using the camera for Skype &amp; FaceTime.
    Thanks

    I don't know about "best" but here is a list of Mac-compatible webcams:
    http://www.mac-compatible-web-cam.com
    If price is no object, one of the best is the one built into the Thunderbolt Display, as long as you don't need to hold the camera by hand and don't mind the size and bulk of a 27" monitor built around your camera:
    http://www.apple.com/displays/

  • Image Quality/Resolution

    Hi I have two Creative Webcams. A Creative Live! Effects and a Creative Live Video IM. The resolution is quite different when the two are compared, the former being the better of the two. Can anyone advise, in their experience, which of the latest range of Creative Webcams offers the highest image quality please Many thanks

    Most of the Creative cameras have a VGA sensor. The image quality of the video IM isn't great at any resolution. The video IM pro is pristine at 640x480, but looks terrible at 76x44. Webcams that have a lower native resolution, look great at lower resoltuions while the same analogy applies to webcams with higher native resolutions

  • HT1338 macbook pro retina webcam poor quality

    I am very happy with my MacBook Pro Retina Display.
    However, the webcan produces very poor image quality, feels like out of focus. (using facetime, imessage, skype, all software the same)
    I went back to my Macbook pro 2011 version, the same 720p webcam, produces very clear picture.
    I read quite a few people having this issues but looks no firm answer. I hope its a software issue.
    I wonder if Apple is looking into this problem.
    Thanks

    Yes, I have recently noticed the exact same issue.  RMBP has very poor webcam quality and is certainly not 720p (HD) display.
    I have compared it to my desktop webcam, a logitech (HD720p camera) and images were by far much more superior for my logitech webcam.
    I hope they do a software fix on the cameras.

  • Brand new E7-00, wity *very* bad image quality

    Yes I did remove the protective film from the camera cover.
    And Yes, I deed clean the glass in front of the camera.
    But the 8M camera produces images worse than a 0.1 megapixel webcam!
    Is this normal? Anything I can do?
    See for a sample:
    https://twitter.com/joosteto/status/242554441247641600/photo/1/large
    Solved!
    Go to Solution.
    Attachments:
    Picture 007.jpg ‏491 KB

    I haven't touched any of the settings so they all are default values, but I'll list the current setting here anyway:
    (my phone switched to Dutch language, and I don't know how to revert it to EN, so I'll try to translate the entries here)
    ColorTone: Normal
    WhiteBalance: Automatic
    Lightening: 0
    ISO_A: Automatic
    Contrast: shows slider in the middle of range
    Sharpness: Normal
    Settings:
      Imagequality: 6M - 16:9
      Record Location: Yes
      Show recorded images: Yes
      ImageTone (??): Camera1 (I now tried camera1..Camera4, they all look similar)
      Use memory: E:MassStorage
    And when the camera is active, the information bar on the bottom of the screen shows the flash is set to "A", to the right of that is again an "A" (I suppose the picture type setting).
    So as far as I know, everything is set to "Automatic", "normal", or "middle of range".
    Also, I don't see a "**bleep** up image quality really bad" option, so whatever the other settings, I wouldn't expect images to be this vague...
    Any recommendations?

  • IChat to AOL/AIM image quality question.

    This is a question about the image quality during a video chat from AOL/AIM and Trillian Pro on PCs to iChat on Macs. The details of the computers, connections and cameras are:
    I'm running 10.4.8 on a MacBook Pro (2.33GHz CPU, 2GB RAM) with iChat AV 3 with a DSL connection that averages 1.24 Mbps DL and 271 Kbps UL and an external iSight camera.
    My mother is running 10.3.9 on an iBook (1.33 GHz CPU, 256 MB RAM) with iChat AV 2.1 with a DSL connection that averages 155 Kbps DL and 146 Kpbs UL and an external iSight camera.
    My sister is running Windows (not sure which version) on a Dell Dimension DIM4600 (2.60GHz CPU, 512MB RAM) with Trillian Pro with a DSL connection that averages 1.29 Mbps DL and 446 Kbps UL and a Logitech QuickCam Pro 4000 with QuickCam 8.3.0.
    When I video chat with my mother my picture to her is good and her picture to me is good.
    When I video chat with my sister my picture to her is good, but her picture to me is bad. The slightest movement causes the image to go break up into large squares that settles back down a decent image when the movement ends.
    When my mother video chats with my sister, my mother's picture to my sister is good, but my sister's picture to my mother is bad. Again, the slightest movement causes the image to go break up into large squares that settles back down a decent image when the movement ends.
    Also I have a friend (some kind of PC, some kind of Logitech webcam) using AOL/AIM 5.9 (I think) with cable modem connection (I don't know the speed). When I video chat with him my picture to him is good, but his picture to me is bad. Again, the slightest movement causes the image to go break up into large squares that settles back down a decent image when the movement ends.
    Does anyone know if:
    (1) this kind of behavior "par for the course" with PCs over the AOL/AIM network?
    or if
    (2) there is some "switch" in Trillian Pro and AOL/AIM 5.9 that needs to be thrown to improve the image (like the Bandwidth switch in iChat preferences)?
    or
    (3) is the camera or camera connection (USB vs. Firewire) that causes the problem?
    Thanks.
    P.S. I know the speed of my mother's DSL connection seems slow, but because our video chat images both ways are good I don't think that's the problem here.

    Hi James,
    I can relate to this somewhat based on AIM 5.9 to Macs.
    You may be able to use the information to sort Trillian out further.
    Ok first start a chat and then open the Connection Doctor from the Video menu at your end.
    The Bit rate should be well over 100 for both of you.
    Her Frame rate should be at least 10fps.
    Now when on AIM 5.9 the framerate drops to about 1fps to the ichat end it is usually because the Pic Quality is set too high on the PC end. It then spends so long producing one frame it slows down sending the video.
    To change this on the AIM app a user has to do the following.
    They click on the preview tab (there are two; one for your incoming and one for their preview).
    With the preview as the front tab a small icon appears to the right of the pic.
    Clicking on this brings up a slider.
    Sliding the slider to the left reduces the quality.
    Visually you may not detect this but the effect is sort of converse in that the frames are produced faster as less detail is in them and the video frame rate goes up and therefore looks smoother.
    I have not heard of Trillian needing this and consequently would not know where specifically to direct you.
    I would start with the Preferences/Properties of Trillian and see if there are any setting there for output.
    Look at size of the pic at their end as well as frame rates that they are aiming at.
    As you say the slower 150ish connection is considered slow in many places now-a-days but is enough for 1-1 chats (min 100kbps).
    The problem is likely to be a setting on the PC end.
    I would also check the Trillian site for info about adjusting the frame rate or video quality. They have an extensive FAQ database.
    10:51 PM Thursday; December 14, 2006

  • Firefox mage quality and resolution was superb when I used XP and Vista. Now that I have Windows 7, however (with the Firefox 3.6.3 version), the image quality and resolution is poor. Please help me!

    I am using the Firefox 3.6.3 version with my new Windows 7 operating system. When I used all the previous Firefox versions in my XP and Vista operating systems, image quality and resolution was excellent! However, now that I have upgraded to Windows 7 and Firefox 3.6.3, the image quality and resolution is poor (unacceptable for downloading purposes).
    == This happened ==
    Every time Firefox opened
    == I first activated my new computer and installed the Firefox 3.6.3.

    All my images are pixelated in firefox 3.6.3
    http://www.dcgdcreative.com
    Not only on my site but on most sites I view.
    The issue is not solved by resetting the zoom text view (ctrl+0)
    The issue is not resolved by starting in safemode with add-ons disabled
    The problem seems to only affect .jpeg files and only on Windows 7 on my desktop; as I have viewed several sites using windows XP with my laptop, no issues.
    I had the same issue with IE8 and was able to fix the problem with by setting up the compatibility view for all sites. Issue fixed no problems at all. But nothing similar for firefox?
    Whats the deal?

  • I want to make a copy of slide show create from my own photographs and with a an audio track behind them. I have carefully followed the iDVD tutorials and burnt the result to a disc but image quality is very poor. What is wrong?

    I want to make a DVD of a slide-show with an audio track behind the photographs. I have carefully followed the iDVD video tutorials but the result is far from satisfactory. The quality of the images on the resulting DVD are blurred and indistict although the original photographs are of a very high quality. Where am I going wrong? Would I have better results from a different program than the inbuilt iDVD and if so so what programs have others found to be better? I should be grateful for some expert guidance.

    Hey Falcopebo,
    Thanks for using Apple Support Communities.
    Looks like you have image quality issues when using iDVD to burn.
    iDVD 7.0: Burned DVD has interlacing, pixelation, or image quality issues
    http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4078
    A standard DVD made by iDVD is made to the standard DVD resolution of 720 X 480, which is smaller than most HDTVs and monitors. When expanded to fit the entire screen or monitor, the image will distort slightly due to upscaling to fit the screen or monitor.
    Have a nice day,
    Mario

  • HT1338 What is the best online storage for photos. Specifically one that allows the original image quality to be downloaded should your hard storage goes belly up

    What is the best online storage for photos. Specifically one that allows the original image quality to be downloaded should your hard storage goes belly up

    I'd put them on an external hard drive(s) and burn them to a DVD as well (at least 2 - 3 copies on different drives/media); I prefer having control and a local solution instead of relying on a server and the possibility of someone (who shouldn't be)  downloading my work.

  • NOT happy with image quality of Lightroom 1.1

    Sure, LR now launches faster and the interface looks a bit nicer. And the more capable sharpening controls and the clarity slider which mimics contrast enhancement with USM are nice additions, but has anyone else notice what happened to the image quality?
    First, while formerly LR and ACR struck a great balance between detail and noise suppressionerring on the side of maintaining detail even at the expense of slightly higher noise levelsit appears the goal for the redesign has been to minimize the appearance of noise at all costs. It just so happens that yesterday afternoon, I'd shot some available light candids (up to ISO 800) of the staff at a local health care facility and was intent on using them as a trial run on Lightroom 1.1. Well, the difference in image quality jumped right out at me: there was no granular noise at all remaining, even in the ISO 800 shots, but neither was there any fine detail. I use a Canon 5D, and while I'm accustomed to slightly higher levels of chroma noise, images up to ISO 1600 in even the worse lighting are always full of fine detail. Fine structures like strands of hair and eye lashes have now lost their delicacy, and have instead become coarse, unnaturally painterly analogs. Looking into shadow areas, I can see the results of what seems to be luminance noise smearing at work, obliterating noise and detail along with it. I never used Raw Shooter because I'm a Mac user (2x2GHz G5 w/2GB RAM and 250GB HD), but if this is the result of incorporating Pixmantic's technology, the result is not a positive one from my standpoint. The images I shot yesterday are to be cropped to 4:5 proportions, then printed 20" x 25", at which size the processing artifacts and lack of fine detail in these LR1.1 conversions becomes even more apparent. I've even tried turning off all image processing options: Clarity, Sharpening and NR (neither of which I ever use in RAW conversion, anyway)... It simply seems this noise smearing is part of the baseline RAW processing, and it really, really bites. Am I missing something? Is there some way to actually turn off this processing that looks uncomfortably like the "watercolor" noise reduction that Kodak and Panasonic use for their compact digicams. Yuck!
    Secondly, is there a way to get back the suppression of hot and stuck pixels that LR used to perform? Now, my high ISO files are riddled with them, the same as they would be when converted with Aperture or Canon's DPP. Default suppression of hot and stuck pixels was a major advantage of LR/ACR, and contributed in no small bit to my adoption of LR as my standard tool for RAW conversion due to the amount of high ISO, low light photography I do. What's even worse, is that the random-color speckles are now smudged into the image along with all the other noise data that's being smoothed out, resulting in images that looks more like impressionist paintings than photographs.
    I thought about reinstalling LR1.0 and just continuing to use that, but if LR1.1 is an indication of the direction Adobe is going to take in the development of the software, I really don't see the point of continuing to use the softwareparticularly when I had a few existing problems with LR1.0 that were never resolved, such as crashing during the import of photos from a memory card and progressively slower preview rendering as the size of my library increased. So, I'm probably going to go back to using Aperture, which is itself not free of IQ foibles, but certainly looks much more attractive now in comparison to LR1.1.
    Anybody notice the same things with IQ? Anybody got any suggestions of how to get more natural-looking conversions before I remove LR and go back to Aperture?

    Jeff,
    I mean no disrespect. But I would like to see samples of 1.1 compared to 1.0 of the same image (ISO 400, and/or 800), because I do not want to convert my library to a catalog until I know whether or not I like the image quality. Why is it so hard to get one good sample. That is all I am asking. I would just rather not jump through hoops to go back to 1.0 if I do not like 1.1....That is all
    And yes, after well over 400 printed articles I can tell what an image will look like in print when I view it 1:1.... I can tell if the eyelashes or pores on someones face, the detail in a rug, or wood grain will be detailed on the off set printed page if I look at the image at 1:1 and see smudging...this means to me that the most detail possible is NOT going to translate to the page. If however I CAN see detail in those types of areas, clearly (ie no smudging), than I know that I will see those fine details on the page. If these fine details were not important than we would all still be shooting with 3 and 4 mp cameras. Those fine details that are only visible to our eyes at a 1:1 preview on screen, are important on the printed page.
    Oh, and I am not chest thumping. You can check my history here, I do not have a history of that type of activity. I am simply asking to see samples before I update....
    I am very discriminating Pro, not some over testing, too much time on my hands, complaining , over paid amateur who only has time to complain that their test chart is out of focus. Or that they can measure toooo much noise at ISO what ever, instead of actually making photos. I actually make my living taking photos. And my clients have come to expect a certain level of quality from me. They comment all the time how much higher quality my images are than some of the other photogs they use. And I am still shooting a D60, where as these others are shooting 5d's and D2X's.
    Jeff, I am not against you or Adobe. Matter of fact, I LOVE LR. It has changed my work flow in a very positive direction. I think it is wonderful. I just want one sample.... I am asking nicely: Please with sugar on top :)
    If you can't give me a sample, than please at least reassure me that it will be easy to go back to 1.0 for the time being. Is it as easy as uninstalling 1.1, reinstalling 1.0 and recovering my DB from a current backup? If so, than fine, I will go this route........... If not, than I am hoping for a sample.
    Thank you very kindly Jeff for engaging in this lively conversation. I do appreciate your comments and participation on this forum. And please note that none of this is said with attitude or malice. I know that some times a writers intent or emotional state is easy to misinterpret in a forum like this. So please know that I am calm and not angry, just curious about image quality.
    Ok. I will shut up now. Thanks again

Maybe you are looking for

  • Using combination values?

    Hi, i have in a tb1 of value1 column data is like 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 etc... all these are different 4 different records in tb1 table. and i have in tb2 table ac column value can be tb1 to tb2 one to many relationship. tb1 of value1 will match with tb2 of

  • My query still running und running  without end

    Hi Everybody, Mr. Randolf allready advice to provide an explain plan but But i cannot beause my query still running und running. What to do please. select D1.c1 as c1,      D1.c2 as c2,      D1.c3 as c3,      D1.c4 as c4,      D1.c5 as c5,      D1.c6

  • Help needed with 6 panel a3 layout

    Hi, I haven't used indesign for quite some time and even when I did I only really dipped my toe in the water.  I have recently purchased the cs5 master collection, mostly for photoshop and illustrator but I have been asked to produce a leaflet and I

  • Read zip files created by ZipOutputStream

    Hello :) I am wondering if it is possible to create a zipfile using ZipOutputStream, which can be read using ZipInputStream with out using the ZipFile work-around discussed in http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?forumID=256&threadID=492219. This is

  • Seeking CF Expert

    Hi All We are looking for ColdFusion expert to lead migration of few sites to new server environment. This is a short term gig with potential for longer term support contract. The tasks include: 1. Installation and configuration of ColdFusion 7.x on