A590IS porting... - page 41 - DryOS Development - CHDK Forum
supplierdeeply
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 ... 97   Go Down

A590IS porting...

  • 968 Replies
  • 410816 Views
*

Offline hitme

  • *
  • 12
Re: A590IS porting...
« Reply #400 on: 23 / November / 2008, 01:33:22 »
Advertisements
i'm sorry
my mistake
crw file's name was changed by me
so???auto rotate is broken
Logged
*

Offline toby

  • *
  • 46
Re: A590IS porting...
« Reply #401 on: 23 / November / 2008, 03:48:42 »
Logged
*

Offline fe50

  • ******
  • 3152
  • IXUS50 & 860, SX10 Star WARs-Star RAWs
    • fe50
Re: A590IS porting...
« Reply #402 on: 23 / November / 2008, 06:04:25 »
Quote from: cyro on 22 / November / 2008, 20:33:04
Maybe whim can tell us something about the framework that cardtricks needs to run properly. It seems to be pretty standard stuff though, since most of us have no problems at all.

Cardtricks & CHDK-Shell are written in the AutoIt scripting language. Homepage: AutoIt v3 - Automate and Script Windows Tasks - For Free!

Cradtricks.exe is a self-expanding file, when it is started it creates a sub-folder on the current folder named Cardtricks and copies it's source code, unpackers, the helper tools, GUI images and some other stuff into this folder.

On the first start of CT it creates also its configuration file named Cardtricks.ini in the folder from where CT was started from.

So check whether you have the permission to write & create files/folders when you start CT; e.g. create a new folder in your personal user area, copy cardtricks.exe there & start it from there...
Logged
*

Offline whim

  • ******
  • 2046
  • A495/590/620/630 ixus70/115/220/230/300/870 S95
Re: A590IS porting...
« Reply #403 on: 23 / November / 2008, 06:19:45 »
@pagnol
@cyro

Quote
Firstly cardtricks 1.41 does not work at all - clicking on the program
does nothing, the program will not run. Nor will version 1.40.
I downloaded versions 1.39 thru 1.25, all of which run
that points to a Windows 9x, which CT no longer supports from version 1.40 Card Tricks - a small utility to help manage SD cards [currently v. 1.41]
I must admit i never actually tested CT on Win 9x

Quote
the 'make bootable' button resolutely remains greyed out
since only a FAT16 partition can be made bootable, button remains disabled
as long as any other or no filesystem is detected.

Quote
Maybe whim can tell us something about the framework that cardtricks needs to run properly
AFAIK CT is does not require anything apart from a working OS
If pagnol is really running Win 9x i suspect some murky long file name issue, although
i have encountered cases of broken and/or non-cooperative SD cards before on this forum ...

Suggestions:

1) try another SD card

2) get access to a Win 2K / Win XP / Vista computer and retry (after all, you should only have to do this once)

3) suggestions if you want to do this at 'low level', all you need to do is:

      - make sure card is formatted @ FAT16 (it should therefor be 4 Gb max.)
      - use a hex editor to write BOOTDISK to offset 0x40 on the boot sector
          (that is what bootable.exe does)

wim

« Last Edit: 23 / November / 2008, 06:24:38 by whim »
Logged
*

Offline toby

  • *
  • 46
Re: A590IS porting...
« Reply #404 on: 23 / November / 2008, 06:49:54 »
mmmh is there noone interested to extend the aperture size to F16.0????

BTW I made a "Speedradar"-script with the cam, but it works not properly yet.
Code: [Select]
@title SpeedCam

@param c Mode: 0-append, 1-replace
@default c 1
@param h delay: (ms)/10
@default h 50



h =h * 10
t = 0
d = 0
print_screen c

while 1
x = t
b = d

press "shoot_half"
sleep h
t = get_tick_count
get_focus d
g = b - d
f = t - x
s = g / f * 3,6
release "shoot_half"
print "Akt. Foc:",d
print "Weg:",g
print "Time:",f
print "Speed:",s
print "      "
wend

end"weg" means distance, and "akt foc" is the current focus

Hmm the camera is a bit to slow, and the focus distance to inaccurate.
With a faster Basic, and faster focus with accurate focusdistance this would be awesome.
Especially for some want-to-be-cop *lol*

The time for one line in the script took 0,029 sec .... how slowish
« Last Edit: 23 / November / 2008, 07:48:00 by toby »
Logged
*

Offline pagnol

  • *
  • 3
Re: A590IS porting...
« Reply #405 on: 23 / November / 2008, 07:48:01 »
Hello Cyro, FE50 and Whim,
Thank you all for replying and for your comments.

Whim,
You have hit the nail on the head. Yes, I am running Windows 98SE. The card is a Fujfilm 1gb and the reader is a SanDisk ImageMate 12in1. I have a 4gb SanDisk Ultra II card as well, although cardtricks (1.39) states I need to use one <=2gb.  I do have a disk editor (quite old and runs in DOS) but I am not happy doing that sort of thing, so would prefer to have it done 'properly', so to speak.
I will get Windows 2k SP4 installed as soon as I can. Then I will have another go and let you know how I get on.
Cyro, thank you for the info on the lock function.

Pagnol.
Logged
*

Offline fe50

  • ******
  • 3152
  • IXUS50 & 860, SX10 Star WARs-Star RAWs
    • fe50
Re: A590IS porting...
« Reply #406 on: 23 / November / 2008, 08:03:39 »
@toby

The A590 datasheet gives F2.6 to F5.5 as available range for this camera.
If the aperture of the A590 is a 'real' aperture (this means: an iris diaphragm) - and in the porting thread somewhere it was written it is such a 6-blade iris - CHDK cant 'override' this mechanical limits.

The aperture should be 2.6 to 5.5 without zoom, the values increases with the zoom (multiples of the F-stop values).

When comparing the pictures with the different aperture values (all taken with the same zoom step and the same settings / under the same ambient conditions): are they really different ?
Logged
*

Offline fe50

  • ******
  • 3152
  • IXUS50 & 860, SX10 Star WARs-Star RAWs
    • fe50
Re: A590IS porting...
« Reply #407 on: 23 / November / 2008, 08:17:13 »
Quote from: toby on 23 / November / 2008, 06:49:54
The time for one line in the script took 0,029 sec .... how slowish

In the current uBasic implementation each line (commands only, not rem lines & labels) takes 10ms of time.
The current implementations of MD (motion detection) has reaction times between ~60ms (the 'better' cameras like the G & S-series with optimized buffer usage) and ~180ms (cheaper ones / unoptimized code).

An alternative to uBasic is Lua, it's faster on execution and has more possibilities...you'll find mor informations here: LUA - CHDK Wiki (including sample scripts; you can also find some informations in german language in the german forum www.wirklemms.de ).
Logged
*

Offline toby

  • *
  • 46
Re: A590IS porting...
« Reply #408 on: 23 / November / 2008, 08:42:03 »
Quote from: fe50 on 23 / November / 2008, 08:03:39
@toby

The A590 datasheet gives F2.6 to F5.5 as available range for this camera.
If the aperture of the A590 is a 'real' aperture (this means: an iris diaphragm) - and in the porting thread somewhere it was written it is such a 6-blade iris - CHDK cant 'override' this mechanical limits.

The aperture should be 2.6 to 5.5 without zoom, the values increases with the zoom (multiples of the F-stop values).

When comparing the pictures with the different aperture values (all taken with the same zoom step and the same settings / under the same ambient conditions): are they really different ?
Yes its a thing with like 6 blades.
I made pictures, with no zoom and i have discovered, that there is a difference between 8.0 (max. setable by canon) and 11.0 overwritten by chdk.
From 11.0 on, there is no change.
But when i look in the Lenses, i can see, when the cam turns into sleep-mode, that the blades close a lot more (looks like 16.0).
So there might be the posibility to improve the aperturerange.

Thx for the LUA link, im gonna have a look.

Greetz Tobi
Logged
*

Offline acetone

  • *
  • 8
Re: A590IS porting...
« Reply #409 on: 23 / November / 2008, 10:50:16 »
Yeah, my tests confirmed at least f/11 with override, but with a sensor this small (1/2.5") the diffraction limit is a serious problem at smaller apertures.  Run the calculator here with the 1/2.5" sensor  from the A590 -- even at f/2.6, diffraction reduces effective resolution (slightly).  At f/8.0, the airy disk is more than 5x the pixel size.   Even if you resample the image down to 1/2 vertical and horizontal resolution (2 megapixels), it won't regain the sharpness lost to diffraction.   I strongly suspect that f/11 isn't going to be worth it for the extra depth of field, since you'll effectively be throwing a huge gaussian blur on everything, and DoF stacking is probably the best option.  I'd like to offer a giant "F*** YOU!" to quantum mechanics for giving us diffraction limits.


Harware ISO Limits:
Lowest ISO: ISO50
Highest ISO: ~1600

Test procedure: (Based on CHDK features suggested tests, tell me if this isn't sufficiently accurate)
* Rest camera on hard surface with view of variable-brightness scene.  Make sure there's a good could good peaks in middle of histogram, by adjusting colors & Ev compensation
* Set Disable Overrides to OFF
* Set ISO to 80 in overrides, and Bracketing in Continuous mode to steps of -5 ISO.
* Set custom timer to 30 sec delay (to allow time for vibrations from pressing button to settle) and 10 shot sequence
* Shoot, making sure nothing moves in scene or no bumps to camera
* Sequence 2: set ISO to 60, bracket in steps of -2 ISO rating, and same timer settings
* For each sequence, find where histogram no longer changes

For high-ISO:
* Same, but started at 1600, increasing in steps of 200,300,50

I'm having a hard time evaluating the sequences for the maximum ISO value, because after the first photo, the histogram seems to smooth out somewhat, without actually moving to the left or right.  It'd be awesome if someone could check me on that before I post this set of limits on the wiki.
« Last Edit: 23 / November / 2008, 12:23:31 by acetone »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 ... 97   Go Up
« previous next »
 

Related Topics
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal