Step Away From the Camera, Ma'am
Mar. 7th, 2006 07:39 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
orikesSport Mode on the camera does not mean you will automatically be able to take professional quality pictures of your children on the basketball court in the school gymnasium!
Grar!
As you would suspect, when doing technical support for a major camera manufacturer, you get questions and concerns on image quality. The standard procedure is to try and troubleshoot the issue as best you can over the phone or e-mail, and then worse comes to worse, send the pictures in by e-mail for someone to take a look at. As it turns out, I've become one of those reviewing someones.
For the most part, I enjoy reviewing sample images. I've gotten to see some really neat pictures, both from the photography standpoint and from the 'Whoa, cool! That camera is really broken and making that woman's face melt' standpoint. The only problem is that most of the time, the image quality concern is coming from someone being DUMB.
Just owning a camera doesn't guarantee you're going to take amazing pictures. The camera is a tool and will have certain limitations. People seem to think that the camera does all the work, so they get upset when one picture comes out bad, or not how they expected. I've seen people take dozens of wonderful pictures, and contact us because one picture came out wrong. I've even had people accuse me of ruining their vacation because their pictures didn't come out. One of our reps had a woman threaten to sue us for the cost of her cruise because her pictures were bad.
I don't mind helping people understand how to get the most out of their camera, or how to work within the limitations (flash range, low light settings, camera shake, orbs), but I really hate when they start screaming that it couldn't possibly be that, and if we can't make a camera that can preform miracles and bear their children, well why are we selling cameras in the first place?
If I see one more indoor gymnasium photograph that's too dark because the person was using Sport Mode (intended for ample daylight for use with high shutter speeds), I'm going to .. to.. shove a camera up someone's nose.
Grar!
As you would suspect, when doing technical support for a major camera manufacturer, you get questions and concerns on image quality. The standard procedure is to try and troubleshoot the issue as best you can over the phone or e-mail, and then worse comes to worse, send the pictures in by e-mail for someone to take a look at. As it turns out, I've become one of those reviewing someones.
For the most part, I enjoy reviewing sample images. I've gotten to see some really neat pictures, both from the photography standpoint and from the 'Whoa, cool! That camera is really broken and making that woman's face melt' standpoint. The only problem is that most of the time, the image quality concern is coming from someone being DUMB.
Just owning a camera doesn't guarantee you're going to take amazing pictures. The camera is a tool and will have certain limitations. People seem to think that the camera does all the work, so they get upset when one picture comes out bad, or not how they expected. I've seen people take dozens of wonderful pictures, and contact us because one picture came out wrong. I've even had people accuse me of ruining their vacation because their pictures didn't come out. One of our reps had a woman threaten to sue us for the cost of her cruise because her pictures were bad.
I don't mind helping people understand how to get the most out of their camera, or how to work within the limitations (flash range, low light settings, camera shake, orbs), but I really hate when they start screaming that it couldn't possibly be that, and if we can't make a camera that can preform miracles and bear their children, well why are we selling cameras in the first place?
If I see one more indoor gymnasium photograph that's too dark because the person was using Sport Mode (intended for ample daylight for use with high shutter speeds), I'm going to .. to.. shove a camera up someone's nose.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-08 01:44 am (UTC)Or I'll email you directly to ask why the hell you're selling these things, if I can't even procreate with my magical math based image maker.
Seriously if I don't sire the Reflector triplets in the future, I'm burning down everywhere that even has a Kodak sign in the window.
I mean really these thjings don't even think basketball is a sport. What's that all about?
[/sarcasm]
(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-08 04:41 pm (UTC)Actually, your company should offer a photography class and when people call, you should recommend that they take it.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-08 05:04 pm (UTC)The only reason I can think of them NOT having done this is that they'd be tempted to do one for every camera model we have, since people want us to teach them how ot use speicifc models. I think last year we had 15 different models come out, and that's not including the 'same but different' models that were made to be released in specific stores. (Like the CW330 is the exact same as the C330, except it's a darker color and was only sold in WalMart).
(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-08 11:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-09 12:36 am (UTC)Of course, we also had some cameras that were only sold at Target too. Target had the C315 (cheapy point and shoot) and was the only one to carry the red V530 (stylish little pocket camera - I actually wouldn't mind one of these).