h a l f b a k e r yWith moderate power, comes moderate responsibility.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Some digital cameras have an optical viewfinder in addition to the LCD display, allowing you to turn off the screen to save battery power. However, when you do this you can't see the flash mode, battery meter etc, so you
1. can't change the flash mode because you dont know what it is and 2 you can't
tell how much battery you have left
Well, what about if there was a mode where the screen was still on, but did not funtion as a viewfinder, but only as a "status screen". This way, you could save battery power by not having the camera display what it's pointed at, but still be able to see camera status. Basically there would be a 3-position screen mode switch- 1- the screen is off but the camera is still on (turned on and off by another switch) 2- the screen shows camera status 3- camera status is shown and it goes into LCD viewfinder mode. THen you could- Use the screen only for what you wanted to, or not use it.
I know this is baked in a different way on some cameras, where there is actually a tiny screen inside the eyepiece rather than being an optical viewfinder, which showed camera status as well as being a VF, in addition to a larger screen that could be turned on if you so desired. But, that's not what my idea is about.
[link]
|
| |
Anyways, a proper implementation of what you want would be to have common camera status indicators as discrete instrumentation, separate from the viewscreen entirely. "onscreen" common status-indicators are a sign that the premium you paid for the device paid for the company's marketing department, not their engineering department. |
|
| |
You're new here, right? Proper language use is a bit of a -thing- around here. You'll get used to it. Comment deletion is somewhat frowned upon, too. |
|
| |
The main problem with your idea is that LCDs use more power to black out an area than they do to display something. |
|
| |
If this was an OLED display though, that would work. |
|
| |
Deleting comments is bad. It's really bad to delete comments that politely disagree with your bad attitude, and then to repeat your original rudeness. |
|
| |
To repeat, there is no such thing as "internet language". Even if there were, Halfbakery rules would take precedence on the Halfbakery. |
|
| |
Follow the rules, whether grammar, politeness or site customs, or flake off. |
|
| |
I didn't know that it took more power to make the LCDs black. Even if so, the screen could drop to its least-energy-use state, then use one corner to display in whatever color is most contrasty. |
|
| |
if it actually takes more power NOT to display stuff, heres a thought- maybe when the screen is off alltogether, (no power to the LCD display at all) the buttons could glow different colors (i.e. have the buttons be clear and put little lights behind them) depending on status. Example- the power button could glow green when the batteries have plenty of power left, yellow when below halfway charged, and red when almost dead. |
|
| |
The flash button, on the other hand, could do something like this.
Green- flash on. Flashing green- auto. Red- red eye reduction on :)
Yellow-flash disabled |
|
| |
ETC
Not too hard to implement. a few lights would have a negligable increase, if any, on the cost of the camera. |
|
| |