Help making CHDK and the forum better - page 5 - General Help and Assistance on using CHDK stable releases - CHDK Forum

Help making CHDK and the forum better

  • 57 Replies
  • 37217 Views
*

Offline PhyrePhoX

  • *****
  • 2254
  • make RAW not WAR
    • PhyreWorX
Re: Help making CHDK and the forum better
« Reply #40 on: 28 / December / 2008, 14:37:47 »
Advertisements
of course being a member with a high post count does NOT justify being an a$$hole. i didnt say that.
but being a newbie does NOT justify being an a$$hole as well. common courtesy is the keyword here.
i also didnt say we should be rude to newcomers.
all i'm saying is, is that it is NOT very nice going somewhere new and be like "gimme this and gimme that".
i want simplicity. in manuals, in sourcecode, in wiki. so do the other "old hands" in this community.

Re: Help making CHDK and the forum better
« Reply #41 on: 28 / December / 2008, 15:19:28 »
Right on.

My 2 cents: more participative members get more respect and more respectful members get more respect.

Members, please commit to the topic and let PhyrePhoX work (by this I mean this discussion ends here).

Thank you
admin

Re: Help making CHDK and the forum better
« Reply #42 on: 28 / December / 2008, 19:23:56 »
-Walking "the walk"...

acseven, giving PhyrePhox carte blanche to behave in this manner is unreasonable. Read the posts of the member in question here (there are not that many), and you will see for yourself that he uses "please" and "thank you" just as he should. PhyrePhox unloaded on him in typical fashion, and it's completely unwarranted! You've stated that you do not own this board; that it is the members who do. Members are speaking, yet you are not listening. PhyrePhox deserves to be reprimanded. There's no reason for his behavior, and it's been growing worse.
As one of those persons having made a special request of the development team and basically being told by PhyrePhox to go $hit in my hat, I feel that he is quite lacking in his skills as a global moderator. (Keep in mind that I had endorsed him and congratulated him!)
The fact that he is an exceptional contributor does NOT make him exempt from behaving with every bit the courtesy that all members must. I stated to PhyrePhox once already that member will indeed lose respect for him over time if he continues to behave towards them in this manner.

Oh, and PhyrePhox, THAT'S what I mean, just so you know. ;)
Whoa-Hey! Careful where you point that thing. You're gonna shoot someone!

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/DoF_Stacking

*

Offline PhyrePhoX

  • *****
  • 2254
  • make RAW not WAR
    • PhyreWorX
Re: Help making CHDK and the forum better
« Reply #43 on: 28 / December / 2008, 20:19:06 »
you gotta be kidding me. the guy we talk about, dont you think his karma speaks for itself? i didnt even smite him, so please dont count my votes there. i cant believe we're having this conversation here. but i will speak no more here in this thread, after all, i am not the first mod to get into a "fight" with you, and i dont wanna be excluded from here because of nothing.


Re: Help making CHDK and the forum better
« Reply #44 on: 28 / December / 2008, 20:51:02 »
Well he should've been nicer to members, too. It was suggested by someone (surprise-surprise) early on in this thread that there be more of a structural forum divide between end-users and developers in an effort to keep "noobs" from aggravating the "special" folks, but you chose to ignore that suggestion despite the fact that it was you who ASKED! I learned from the BF "experience" but apparently you did not.

...And here we are. :D
Whoa-Hey! Careful where you point that thing. You're gonna shoot someone!

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/DoF_Stacking

Re: Help making CHDK and the forum better
« Reply #45 on: 29 / December / 2008, 08:35:50 »
Now I have it almost complete, 80Kb. Just need some help to describe better the following features:

- DNG Format (for the coming soon new trunk)
- RAW buffer cached (new feature added together with the obove described)
- Remote Parameters (and its sub-menu)

Maybe is a good Idea to divide this CHDK User Manual in parts, like:RAW.txt, Zebra.txt, OSD.txt.... in order to have smallest books more readable.

I have to say that I didn't create any of the text, just I copied and pasted from the wiki and the forum, and mostly from http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK/End-Users-Guide-AllBest50, credit to Graystar.

This is what I have already done.

Fantastic job, lrossel. I love Graystar's work, but this can go into my camera for quick reference.
Whoa-Hey! Careful where you point that thing. You're gonna shoot someone!

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/DoF_Stacking

Re: Help making CHDK and the forum better
« Reply #46 on: 02 / January / 2009, 16:01:12 »
Well, I'm a newbie. And I was looking for specific information. And, of course, I didn't find it :)

So here's a few n00b suggestions:
1. Wiki isn't really feature organized. It took me 5 minutes to find CHDK feature list (got delayed on other, just as interesting pages ;) ). And when I found it, the features didn't have hyperlinks to pages with more detailed explanation.
2. Features are not well explained. Sometimes the author assumes I know what he is talking about. Some links to wikipedia or other sites explaining the more technical terms would be welcome.
3. I especially missed information on hardware limitations (impossible to do features)
4. It would be nice if there was some info on planned new ports (e.g. digic 4 cameras)

Otherwise, this SW rocks !  :D

*

Offline Hacki

  • ****
  • 358
  • SX100
Re: Help making CHDK and the forum better
« Reply #47 on: 02 / January / 2009, 16:15:52 »
Quote
1. Wiki isn't really feature organized. It took me 5 minutes to find CHDK feature list (got delayed on other, just as interesting pages Wink ). And when I found it, the features didn't have hyperlinks to pages with more detailed explanation.

True. I guess the three handbooks are the closest to what you were looking for:
CHDK firmware usage - CHDK Wiki
CHDK firmware usage/AllBest - CHDK Wiki
CHDK/MoreBest - CHDK Wiki

(Three for different versions of chdk, where the last one is the newest one)

Quote
2. Features are not well explained. Sometimes the author assumes I know what he is talking about. Some links to wikipedia or other sites explaining the more technical terms would be welcome.

Well. Maybe it is assumed that people who are interested enough in firmware hacks for cameras know fairly enough about technological terms as well as photographic terms.. (At least i'd think so, and if someone doesnt know a term, he/she can look into wikipedia/google themselves, adding direct links would just be a little more convenient)

Quote
3. I especially missed information on hardware limitations (impossible to do features)

Not sure what you mean by that. Most features which people can image but cant be implemented are requested regularly and are regularly denied, just have a look at the feature request section of this board. (for example higher resolution video modes)

Quote
4. It would be nice if there was some info on planned new ports (e.g. digic 4 cameras)

Ports are not planned. CHDK is a loose open source community, there are no dedicated "porters". If someone with ASM skills happens to buy a non-supported canon camera and finds out about CHDK, theres a chance chdk will get ported to said camera, otherwise, the chances are slim.

All in all, you got a point about the messy wiki. But it's a wiki, and if you dont like it, make it better. Take your time to get chdk to know, and improve said points. The community and millions (maybe exaggerated) of other n00bs would thank you.  ;)

Regards





*

Offline fe50

  • ******
  • 3099
  • IXUS50 & 860, SX10 Star WARs-Star RAWs
    • fe50
Re: Help making CHDK and the forum better
« Reply #48 on: 02 / January / 2009, 16:36:03 »
Hello, welcome velis !

1. Wiki isn't really feature organized. It took me 5 minutes to find CHDK feature list (got delayed on other, just as interesting pages ;) ). And when I found it, the features didn't have hyperlinks to pages with more detailed explanation.
2. Features are not well explained. Sometimes the author assumes I know what he is talking about. Some links to wikipedia or other sites explaining the more technical terms would be welcome.

Well, most developers don't like writing documentations...and not to forget: the language barrier...

But - it's a wiki - you (and also everybody who use CHDK on his camera) should help to make the documentation better, more complete and maybe also better structured !
Also 'n00bs' can start with small corrections an additions, e.g. correcting typos or add internal links.
There's a discussion page for each wikia article, so missing or incomprehensible informations can be discussed there.

Quote
3. I especially missed information on hardware limitations (impossible to do features)
Not so easy, each camera has different hardware / software limits, some limits also depends on the current settings (e.g. Av / Tv / scene mode, MF enabled/disabled). A pivot chart with all cameras and features / limitations would be nice, but it's extremely difficult, there must be also fixed test conditions etc.
BTW - you found Camera Features already ?

Quote
4. It would be nice if there was some info on planned new ports (e.g. digic 4 cameras)
Hehe - you need a crystal ball for this !
A new port is a very difficult, extremly time expensive process, developers with ARM assembler & C programming skills + enough free time for such a project are rare...
But there's hope: The new camera generation (also the new Digic IV cameras) can be ported...
You'll find more informations on the camera articles in the wikia, just search for the model name  ;)
« Last Edit: 02 / January / 2009, 16:39:38 by fe50 »

Re: Help making CHDK and the forum better
« Reply #49 on: 06 / January / 2009, 06:08:34 »
Thanks for the replies guys.

To clarify:
In point 3 i was referring to lack of info about problems with video resolutions (as that was the info I was looking for)
Now I found a thread that explains the problems involved:
Higher 320x240 FPS?
Well, from what I learned from this thread I now know that I need to buy SX-1 instead of SX-10 as they are completely different cameras even though on first sight it looks like they are (almost) the same.

However what I was referring to was that there is no single article on the wiki for us noobs that would explain why video resolutions can't be scaled. However, judging from the info in the article, my current camera (S2 IS) would still be theoretically capable of filming 2048 x 480 @ 30FPS, provided that the DIGIC II is fast enough to encode that and the card can take the badwidth. That would still provide a lot more detail than 640 x 480 @ 30 FPS

As for point 4:
I understand the amount of time involved, but I do not understand the process. So if I were to try a port to SX1 IS I would probably not sit quiet about this and only publish the results when it was done (or fail miserably somewhere along the way). I'm guessing a port may well be under development, but I have no idea where the people doing it are exchanging ideas.

As for Wiki: I'm new. I'm a n00b. I sincerely doubt you guys would look favorably on my super duper idea to trash the main page and start anew with some stupid layout that on top of not being informative enough also contains dead links, missing articles ant all the similar stuff :D Exaggeration intentional.
More seriously - how would one go about doing this?
For example - my primary focus with cameras is in videos. Just about any camera is better than my level of knowledge in (and feel for) photography so that only leaves video. I refuse to buy a standard video camera for a multitude of reasons which means that an important aspect of my camera purchase decision is what it can do with video.
So I found this page while looking for differences and possible solutions for the two models that I was comparing: SX1 IS and SX10 IS. Only yesterday I learned that the major difference between these cameras is in CCD. SX1 has a new super fast CMOS sensor, SX10 has an older model. I have no idea what other differences there are between these sensors, etc, etc.
So, looking for info on videos, i tried to determine whether the SX10 was capable of shooting 720p (which is enough for me), but at the same time, I needed the same info for SX1 as by default it only provides 1080p (+480p, but this is insufficient).
So far I have only learned a few things: limit #1 is by the sensor, limit #2 is the processor which compresses the movie into a stream, limit #3 is the card speed + camera <--> card interface speed.
I still have no knowledge about other limits, like why can't horizontal res be adjusted if the sensors only limit vertical res., why can't a lower frame rate be chosen, etc, etc
So, in the end I now have some knowledge about this, but I believe still not enough. I can write a page about this, but it will still lack lots of info. and then I would still have to place the new page somewhere into the wiki...

Sorry about all the whining, I'd like to help, but I am currently unqualified to do so, at least in my opinion.
« Last Edit: 06 / January / 2009, 06:12:39 by velis »

 

Related Topics