With all the commotion around the next-generation iPhone (4th Gen — if you’re keeping track) today, I started to think about the flash mechanisms used in mobile phones and small point-and-shoot cameras.

As you may have seen, the next-gen iPhone has a small flash next to the camera’s lens (photo below).

This is the way most camera phones position their small LED flash. Point-and-shoot cameras also position their flash off to the side. I suppose this is an age-old method which works.

In the professional world of photography there’s a type of flash called a ring flash. It it literally a ring of light which is positioned around the lens for a very even lighting effect. Read: Very few harsh shadows — offset flashes (like those in mobile phones and point-and-shoot cameras) produce harsh shadows. Ring flashes are generally quite expensive, but that’s because they’re large and very versatile.

I think that devices with small lenses and built-in flashes should implement ring flashes because it would produce much brighter and even lighting compared to current offset technologies used. Also, there would be less chance for users of these devices to accidentally cover the flash when taking a photo because covering the flash would mean covering the lens; you’d be able to clearly see that you’re covering the lens on the camera’s display.

I believe a ring flash would even on be a great idea on prosumer point-and-shoot cameras like Panasonic’s Lumix range or Canon’s G9/G10/G11 cameras. Imagine the flash being on the end of the zoom lens. Yeah, epic!

Removing the flash from an offset location on the aforementioned devices would mean more room for features like stereo microphones, reverse displays, and larger lenses or more compact cameras/devices.

Lastly, if you’ve ever seen photographs created using a ring flash, then you’ll know that reflections of the ring flash look mighty radical.

Should basic consumer cameras implement ring flashes into their design? Would the basic (non-geek) consumer even are about this feature before seeing the difference in photos?

Share your thoughts below.

Short URL: http://djsteen.com/wp/p/920

Last night I had some trouble accessing various areas on Viddler; namely my dashboard.

After about half an hour everything was back to normal and Viddler now has a new video page design. The most exciting new features — widescreen without letterboxing, faster player loading, new embedding options — are detailed on The Viddler Spotlight.

The very first thing I noticed, though, was how much more it looked like YouTube. I think the only difference between the two now is: Viddler has a larger player, better quality, does better widescreen, and displays the related videos slightly differently. And, yes, if the user allows it, you can download Viddler videos.

While Viddler’s on-site video viewing may make YouTube regulars feel comfortable on Viddler, I think previous designs were better, and people should be used to other video sites being different (in features and design).

The following images show Viddler (left) and YouTube (right) side by side:

I’m not too sure why Viddler’s new design wasn’t shown to Viddlerers (for approval) like the grey bar was.
I admit, I don’t mind the grey bar, but I still would prefer the green one. I love the new features (yay for bug fixes), but I’m not to sure the YouTube design will grow on me.

Short URL: http://djsteen.com/wp/p/11