Tilt2 World Phone secondary camera? - Touch Pro2, Tilt 2 Accessories

Does the Tilt2 (World Phone) have the secondary camera for Video conferencing and what software can I use besides the built-in dialer for that?

Long story short:
No.

Only in Europe model

any chance of having it installed.

Possibly, but that means [at this point] finding either a euro parts phone, or waiting until an aftermarket company can source just the front facing camera pieces.
Chances are the traces and connections are all intact though, unless AT&T decided to be really annoying.
EDIT: As far as software that will take advantage of the FFC, the only one I know of is VzoMobile. Which apparently is no longer free.

Related

Newbie question: opinions on which ROM?

Hi all,
I've been looking around the threads for a while now and while I'm excitedly waiting for my U1000 which I just bought on ebay I'm wondering if people have an opinion on which ROM to use. Are there pro's and cons on each or is it just mostly visual?
So far I've been reading about Black Dual by PK 3.0, AP ROM v4.0, v3.0 and the older Black one.
I thought it would be simply a case of going for the latest but that doesn't seem to be the case. The 4.0 and Black Dual seem to be the same age but don't seem to be the same. Is one better then the other? Does one suit a different use case better than another?
Thanks for any guidance.
Before deciding which ROM, I felt it will be safer to use your newly bought U1000 for awhile to ensure set stability and it’s characteristic. Then when you flash other ROM, you will have better understanding of your set.
PK is the head chef for the Athena Project (AP) it is not PK Dual 3 it is AP Dual 3 and it came out a long time before AP4 which is based on the 7510 ROM and is, by far, the latest and greatest.
AP4 is the one to go for IMHO.
The answer is always the same in ICT: the best is the second release of the latest so AP 4.1 (some bug fix, more ram and more system resources, may latest opera, and ..., SPL with a way to go back to the standard one, just in case). I am still using AP2 on mine but AP3 also works fine
sergiopi said:
... so AP 4.1 (some bug fix, more ram and more system resources, may latest opera, and ..., SPL with a way to go back to the standard one, just in case). I am still using AP2 on mine but AP3 also works fine
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How come you're still on AP2 if you don't mind me asking?
I thought I may just defualt to the latest and greatest and go with AP 4.1 but the black dual screen shots look nice and I like some of the Dual Touch features that seem to have been added to that one (I'm guessing they're not in the AP4?).
If it's the 7510 ROM does that mean the front camera on my U1000 won't work as the 7501/10 don't have a vga camera?
mactablet said:
How come you're still on AP2 if you don't mind me asking?
I thought I may just defualt to the latest and greatest and go with AP 4.1 but the black dual screen shots look nice and I like some of the Dual Touch features that seem to have been added to that one (I'm guessing they're not in the AP4?).
If it's the 7510 ROM does that mean the front camera on my U1000 won't work as the 7501/10 don't have a vga camera?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't checked the video call application but in the camera application the Front Camera could'nt be used. In AP2, in the camera application, I have the front camera too
Video call doesn’t exist in AP3 and 4 unless the dial skin has the video button.
About the Front Camera (secondary VGA videocall camera), if that is what you are referring to,
can be activate from camera application top centre 3 buttons, on the left.
pdajoy said:
Video call doesn’t exist in AP3 and 4 unless the dial skin has the video button.
About the Front Camera (secondary VGA videocall camera), if that is what you are referring to,
can be activate from camera application top centre 3 buttons, on the left.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OOOPS! I haven't fully checked the camera app, I checked it now also in standard resolution. Yes, it has the video call feature, just uncheck "disable phone skin" button in REALVGA (and use the 192 DPI resolution)
If you leave the phone skin enabled in 96 or 128 DPI you can't check the number you are dialing, because the SKIN isnt' designed for 128 or 96 DPI.
But you STILL have video call feature
Video calls working great!
After reading, today I untick the “disable phone skin” on Real VGA before switch to other dpi.
Surprised to find in both dpi 192 and 128, I have the video button and can make video calls.
Video was clear and sharp provided the other party stay put.
Very happy to find it working wonderfully, many thanks to the AP teams.
Thanks sergiopi, otherwise I may still thinking it it not availabe.
Oh, why there is the need to tick the "disable phone skin" in the first place?
Find it strange way to disable a feature which is available all the time.
mactablet said:
Hi all,
I've been looking around the threads for a while now and while I'm excitedly waiting for my U1000 which I just bought on ebay I'm wondering if people have an opinion on which ROM to use. Are there pro's and cons on each or is it just mostly visual?
So far I've been reading about Black Dual by PK 3.0, AP ROM v4.0, v3.0 and the older Black one.
I thought it would be simply a case of going for the latest but that doesn't seem to be the case. The 4.0 and Black Dual seem to be the same age but don't seem to be the same. Is one better then the other? Does one suit a different use case better than another?
Thanks for any guidance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like you've got one more choice to try, courtesy of Irus. Especially if your unit is still under warranty.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=390328
pdajoy said:
Oh, why there is the need to tick the "disable phone skin" in the first place?
Find it strange way to disable a feature which is available all the time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I found the reason today, bad experience with the video button available.
Contact name list and keyed phone number most of the time not shown.
Revert back to normal, without video button...sign.
I think it's sort of worse now
I have seen so many choices, vanilla 3, black dual, AP2,3,4 ahhhhh.
I might just try the stock one with the spb or whatever that add on is called and see how i go for a while.
p.s. what's an SPL?

panorama photo mod

Hi
I recently discovered that when i take panorama photos, i get pretty low quality photos, for example 400 x 2672pixels whereas before on my samsung wave (5mp cam vs 8mp of my gsII) i had much better panorama photos. Looking how much better my gsII is in most views, i still find it very hard to accept that my old wave would still be better in some things (however, i still think bada was the better one in terms of os, it was just really undersupported development and appwise, but the inbuilt music recogniser, which they, strange enough, deleted in bada 2.0, or the option to plan sms messages to be sent on a certain time in the stock message center really pleased me). I was just wondering if some brilliant developer from here was able to somehow make a mod, (would like it to be as close to stock samsung cam as possible) which would make my panoramaphotos use more or less the full potential of the cam. by the way, sorry for my language, i'm not a native speaker and even in my language i seem to have a tendency to make my sentences way too long

[Q] Reflections and questions on camera apps for custom ROMs

Hi!
I have been a heavy user of custom ROMs for more than three years now on all my Android devices. Lately, although I have a phone that not so long ago was still Samsung's flagship (the galaxy S4, I9505), the pictures I get with it really suck. A couple weeks ago, the phone could not detect my SIM card (pure hardware issue), so I re-installed the stock firmware and took it to the repair shop to get the warranty repair. They fixed it and I got my phone back. Just to make sure it was working fine, I decided to use the stock ROM for a while, and oh surprise: the camera takes much better pics in low light conditions or indoor than the same camera with any custom ROM app (usually AOSP-based, AOKP or CM-based). I tried to download the Google camera, and the low light pictures really suck. Then I tried a bunch of camera apps from the Play store, but I invariably got similar results to what I got with my custom ROMs.
That got me thinking. I'm no dev nor programmer, so I won't get technical, but it seems to me that there can be two reasons for the samsung app to work better:
- Either it has access to (proprietary) hardware drivers that other camera apps cannot access, and therefore it can get everything out of the camera hardware
- Or Samsung (which is not known to be great for its software) has developed a great camera software.
I would think it's something along the lines of the first reason. So does that mean I am either stuck with a ROM I cannot stand (Touchwiz is awful, has always been, and may always be) and a decent camera, or a decent ROM but a camera that is kind of useless when I'm indoor?
If so, how are the cameras on other similar phones (I'm thinking Nexus 5, Sony Xperia, etc.), running on custom ROMs compared to the stock camera apps? Is there also a noticeable difference, or is it just with Samsung?
I understood that you cannot run the Samsung camera apk on a custom ROM (even one on a Samsung phone), because the camera relies on some kind of Samsung proprietary framework.
Does this mean I should be looking for a phone that is running not only on open source software, but also open source hardware, does that even exist?
Anyone has noticed something similar? Am I the only one to be bothered by this?
I'll post here a couple pics taken in the same ambient light conditions. One with the Samsung camera (Auto setting), one with Google camera, and one with another camera app from the market (don't remember which one, but I tested about 15 of them and their results were quite similar).
Anyway, even if you don' have a solution to the problem but can point me to information that could help me understand how to choose my next phone, I would really appreciate. Thanks!
Cheers,
Fa
fabecoool said:
Hi!
I have been a heavy user of custom ROMs for more than three years now on all my Android devices. Lately, although I have a phone that not so long ago was still Samsung's flagship (the galaxy S4, I9505), the pictures I get with it really suck. A couple weeks ago, the phone could not detect my SIM card (pure hardware issue), so I re-installed the stock firmware and took it to the repair shop to get the warranty repair. They fixed it and I got my phone back. Just to make sure it was working fine, I decided to use the stock ROM for a while, and oh surprise: the camera takes much better pics in low light conditions or indoor than the same camera with any custom ROM app (usually AOSP-based, AOKP or CM-based). I tried to download the Google camera, and the low light pictures really suck. Then I tried a bunch of camera apps from the Play store, but I invariably got similar results to what I got with my custom ROMs.
That got me thinking. I'm no dev nor programmer, so I won't get technical, but it seems to me that there can be two reasons for the samsung app to work better:
- Either it has access to (proprietary) hardware drivers that other camera apps cannot access, and therefore it can get everything out of the camera hardware
- Or Samsung (which is not known to be great for its software) has developed a great camera software.
I would think it's something along the lines of the first reason. So does that mean I am either stuck with a ROM I cannot stand (Touchwiz is awful, has always been, and may always be) and a decent camera, or a decent ROM but a camera that is kind of useless when I'm indoor?
If so, how are the cameras on other similar phones (I'm thinking Nexus 5, Sony Xperia, etc.), running on custom ROMs compared to the stock camera apps? Is there also a noticeable difference, or is it just with Samsung?
I understood that you cannot run the Samsung camera apk on a custom ROM (even one on a Samsung phone), because the camera relies on some kind of Samsung proprietary framework.
Does this mean I should be looking for a phone that is running not only on open source software, but also open source hardware, does that even exist?
Anyone has noticed something similar? Am I the only one to be bothered by this?
I'll post here a couple pics taken in the same ambient light conditions. One with the Samsung camera (Auto setting), one with Google camera, and one with another camera app from the market (don't remember which one, but I tested about 15 of them and their results were quite similar).
Anyway, even if you don' have a solution to the problem but can point me to information that could help me understand how to choose my next phone, I would really appreciate. Thanks!
Cheers,
Fa
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So here come the pics. Of course XDA compresses them, but you'll get the idea.
Fa
That is the example difference between things that are built for the device over using open-source options. Software will always be better from the OEM. You see the same thing with HTC and Sony devices. Take the m7 and m8. They have great cameras as long as you use HTC Sense. Other wise all you get is a basic 4 mpx camera that sucks. If you want one that works the same no matter the rom then get a nexus. This is something OEM are doing to make people want to use their software
Thanks @zelendel,
A Nexus could be an option, but the screen size of the Nexus 5 was already too large for me (and so is my current phone, the Galaxy S4), so there's no way I'm getting a Nexus 6 (plus it's prohibitively expensive, at least here in Europe). When will Google make a Nexus mini or compact? That would rock, especially if they go the Sony way (not compromising too much on hardware features). The only downside of Nexus phone is their lack of MicroSD card slot, but that's off topic.
Anyway, what about the Google Edition phones? As I understand, they have the same hardware as their OEM counterpart (don't they?), but instead of running on proprietary stock ROMs, they ship with a pure Vanilla Android. Does this mean they ship with a camera that sucks, or is there some kind of tweak included to get the most of the camera with those editions, too? If so, would flashing that ROM help (if I can get my hands on it)? Unfortunately it seems the whole Google Edition concept has not gained a lot of traction (maybe because of the unavailability of the handsets in many places, maybe thanks to the OEM who did not play fair game and rather managed to get their crappy proprietary stock versions in the hands of customers), so I'm trying not to get too excited about this either.
I guess I will have to go to my local phone shop, spend time there with different devices and see if some of them have less heavily customized skins than TouchWiz. That means I'll no longer go for a Samsung, which have been my only devices so far. The end of an era...
fabecoool said:
Thanks @zelendel,
A Nexus could be an option, but the screen size of the Nexus 5 was already too large for me (and so is my current phone, the Galaxy S4), so there's no way I'm getting a Nexus 6 (plus it's prohibitively expensive, at least here in Europe). When will Google make a Nexus mini or compact? That would rock, especially if they go the Sony way (not compromising too much on hardware features). The only downside of Nexus phone is their lack of MicroSD card slot, but that's off topic.
Anyway, what about the Google Edition phones? As I understand, they have the same hardware as their OEM counterpart (don't they?), but instead of running on proprietary stock ROMs, they ship with a pure Vanilla Android. Does this mean they ship with a camera that sucks, or is there some kind of tweak included to get the most of the camera with those editions, too? If so, would flashing that ROM help (if I can get my hands on it)? Unfortunately it seems the whole Google Edition concept has not gained a lot of traction (maybe because of the unavailability of the handsets in many places, maybe thanks to the OEM who did not play fair game and rather managed to get their crappy proprietary stock versions in the hands of customers), so I'm trying not to get too excited about this either.
I guess I will have to go to my local phone shop, spend time there with different devices and see if some of them have less heavily customized skins than TouchWiz. That means I'll no longer go for a Samsung, which have been my only devices so far. The end of an era...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The GPE device dont come with stock android completely. I have a GPE HTC M7 and the gpe software has some of the closed sourced drivers and such for things like Beats audio and the camera. As I run pure AOSP I wind up with a 4mpx camera that really sucks. While i agree alot of the newer devices have huge screens that make it almost pointless for me. The m7 is not bad at about 5in. But then again it doesnt have an SD card slot but comes with 32gb of storage which I think is plenty for my use. Part of me misses my old samsung devices but I made the mistake once of getting the one with the Samsungs chip and not the snapdragon which killed development.
zelendel said:
The GPE device dont come with stock android completely. I have a GPE HTC M7 and the gpe software has some of the closed sourced drivers and such for things like Beats audio and the camera. As I run pure AOSP I wind up with a 4mpx camera that really sucks. While i agree alot of the newer devices have huge screens that make it almost pointless for me. The m7 is not bad at about 5in. But then again it doesnt have an SD card slot but comes with 32gb of storage which I think is plenty for my use. Part of me misses my old samsung devices but I made the mistake once of getting the one with the Samsungs chip and not the snapdragon which killed development.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright! Well, if I could find the GPE edition for my phone (I9505), then I would get all the camera features and none of the TouchWiz crap, which would already be quite an improvement over what I have now (complete TW stock). I guess another possibility would be to flash a stock based ROM that is rooted and from which I could remove all the bloatware...
OK, the hunt is on for a new ROM!
Cheers!
Fa
fabecoool said:
Alright! Well, if I could find the GPE edition for my phone (I9505), then I would get all the camera features and none of the TouchWiz crap, which would already be quite an improvement over what I have now (complete TW stock). I guess another possibility would be to flash a stock based ROM that is rooted and from which I could remove all the bloatware...
OK, the hunt is on for a new ROM!
Cheers!
Fa
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you want all the features of the camera then yes I would run a stock de bloated rom. I used to run Samsung devices and you can remove most things which will give you the camera app which has all the best features.

Why can't the camera have BOTH of best worlds?

The camera's manual mode is darn good. After som shooting, I can see that. It's especially good for stills.
BUT that auto mode is average to not good. I hear some chatter that this camera is for content creators --- those who don't want just auto mode.
I guess the question is --- why can't we have it both ways? What am I missing? Why can't auto jpegs be processed well (pixel-like, for those want it), along with a great manual features? My ILC can do both --- and it's only got one sensor. So, what gives here? I'm just not sure why we need to compromise.
Put simply, there are some situations where I want to shoot manual and some that I just want to shoot in P&S mode.
The best picture isn't always technically the best one, but rather what can be caught in focus in the frame. Seems reasonable to me.
You can use Google Camera for HDR+ Auto Mode. It also generate Raw files for post-processing if jpeg is not good enough.
Link for you: https://www.celsoazevedo.com/files/android/google-camera/
For example: photo with more colors is hdr+ auto mode. Other is raw with snapseed.
Which port do you recommend??? Thanks much.
coldbeverage said:
The camera's manual mode is darn good. After som shooting, I can see that. It's especially good for stills.
BUT that auto mode is average to not good. I hear some chatter that this camera is for content creators --- those who don't want just auto mode.
I guess the question is --- why can't we have it both ways? What am I missing? Why can't auto jpegs be processed well (pixel-like, for those want it), along with a great manual features? My ILC can do both --- and it's only got one sensor. So, what gives here? I'm just not sure why we need to compromise.
Put simply, there are some situations where I want to shoot manual and some that I just want to shoot in P&S mode.
The best picture isn't always technically the best one, but rather what can be caught in focus in the frame. Seems reasonable to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your ILC is a dedicated camera. Everything in it is designed for one job and one job only, to produce the best image possible with the processing chips and jpg engines all dedicated to this end. That's all it does, that whole box. A cellphone is a jack of all trades and there's a saying about jack of all trades, master of none. At no point would I ever put a current cellphone up against a current dedicated camera for imaging. The camera will win every time. Cellphones have encouraged an attitude of good enough when in reality, we know it isn't. To be certain, cellphones these days do a lot better than the first DSLRs and definitely better than my first digital camera.
Problem is that a cellphone is literally everything crammed into one tiny space. Music player, computer, internet modem, phone, television screen, video camera, and camera.... er, make that cameras. All of that screaming for limited space and resources, battery and processors. A dedicated camera is one sensor and it is usually much larger than any cellphone camera sensor. That one sensor usually has room to breath, literally, to help keep it from overheating and not stress the hardware. Cellphones don't get that luxury. A dedicated camera has dedicated AF systems, often times an entirely dedicated set of sensors just for that. Metering is also an entirely separate area of development and testing.
So while we have been lulled into thinking cellphones are great cameras, in reality, they aren't. There's still a lot of times that it is best to have a dedicated camera.
Right, agreed, but it seems to often come down to a software issue in the cameras. Have full manual controls for manual purposes and have good auto processing. Or, am I still missing the point? I could be very wrong here.
coldbeverage said:
Right, agreed, but it seems to often come down to a software issue in the cameras. Have full manual controls for manual purposes and have good auto processing. Or, am I still missing the point? I could be very wrong here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, software will be the same problem. For a dedicated camera company, you have an entire company coming up with the engines and algo's going into the camera. Versus a cellphone company having to split their development between a lot of teams but they're going to be pretty small and at best, just able to tweak previous versions of software for their small corner of the device. The company I work for does software for a lot of various things a pharmacy might want to do. We have around 4 devs per team to pull off all the things in a pharmacy. Whereas there are some companies out there that do just one of the things we do and dedicate a much larger team to it. (Up to 100 people working on one piece of software vs our overall team of maybe 10.) That's the difference between a cellphone and a dedicated camera.
coldbeverage said:
Which port do you recommend??? Thanks much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Latest stable port in my link. You have to test some settings to get the best result. Also I hear that Oreo version has improved camera.
starrynighthn said:
Latest stable port in my link. You have to test some settings to get the best result. Also I hear that Oreo version has improved camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. A couple of them work. Any advice on settings? I found some, but curious if you got something better.
CHH2 said:
Again, software will be the same problem. For a dedicated camera company, you have an entire company coming up with the engines and algo's going into the camera. Versus a cellphone company having to split their development between a lot of teams but they're going to be pretty small and at best, just able to tweak previous versions of software for their small corner of the device. The company I work for does software for a lot of various things a pharmacy might want to do. We have around 4 devs per team to pull off all the things in a pharmacy. Whereas there are some companies out there that do just one of the things we do and dedicate a much larger team to it. (Up to 100 people working on one piece of software vs our overall team of maybe 10.) That's the difference between a cellphone and a dedicated camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm actually curious if there's any way to adjust LG's Auto settings. I think from what I've heard, the most common issues are that the photos come out over-exposed and over-processed and smoothed out. Is there any way to go into the LG's software and tone down the exposure brightness and smoothing a bit? I'm sure I'm oversimplifying it but I wonder if there is some sort of setting values we can change so that way everything else remains the same.

Question Pixel 6 camera module

I was wondering about something, to me it looks like the Pixel 6 and Pro camera module is the same except the extra camera for the Pro. If you were to get a broken Pixel 6 Pro, and took that camera module and put it into the Pixel 6. Could the zoom camera work? It may require tricking Google into thinking you have a Pro via software but I'm thinking it might be possible.
Feasible? Cost effective? Worth it? Probably not, at least right now.. More just something I'm curious about if anyone has any ideas?
Not just the module. Also the case. And the software mod would have to mix support for the p6p camera and p6 screen. Also there are other hardware differences. And then any software or security updates would force repeating the software changes, so would probaby be need to treated as a full custom ROM project...
Makes the price difference for a Google supported p6p with a warranty look ok
And the motherboard. The camera must be connected. It's not enough to just mount it.
WibblyW said:
Not just the module. Also the case. And the software mod would have to mix support for the p6p camera and p6 screen. Also there are other hardware differences. And then any software or security updates would force repeating the software changes, so would probaby be need to treated as a full custom ROM project...
Makes the price difference for a Google supported p6p with a warranty look ok
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh yeah, like I said it was just a thought I had after looking at both phones. Yeah, custom ROM would be the best bet.
morphvale said:
And the motherboard. The camera must be connected. It's not enough to just mount it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That I wasn't sure about, I know it would be possible for them to both use the same connector. I haven't looked though, so probably not.

Categories

Resources