I have been using an iPod photo to automatically store my pictures from Lifeblog. In the setting dialog box in iTunes, there is an option to include full-resolution photos. The option is so kind as to explain why you would choose between full-resolution or part resolution (see figure).
There are a few reasons I think this is offered. First of all, low-resolution images are easier to transfer and take up less storage on the iPod. This also leaves more room for music. Secondly, if you are only viewing the photos on the iPod, there is no reason to have the full-resolution image. This also makes browsing of the photos faster (I think. Depends on the way the iPod photos handles thumbnails.).
But, if you want to share the photos, such as using the iPod as a USB storage device for photos, you would want the full-resolution pictures so that whomever you share with or wherever you choose to get one of the pictures, you have the full thing, not some wimpy small copy (Actually, I don’t know what resolution the low-resolution pictures have.). Also, if you are showing them on a TV, it wouldn’t hurt to have a higher resolution picture. VGA doesn’t look all that bad on a TV, since TV resolutions are crummy anyway. But, I ‘thought’ I saw a significant improvement with my megapixel images on the TV.
What I am getting at is that we in Lifeblog Central have the same issue. On the PC, Lifeblog keeps everything at full resolution. But, for the mobile, will people want full-resolution, or would they like to get a lower-resolution copy?
For the same reasons listed above, the argument can go both ways when putting pictures onto the mobile device: storage space, sharing issues, and speed of browsing. In Lifeblog 1.0, we reduced photo when they were transferred back to the phone. In Lifeblog 1.5 we decided to transfer the full size photo. Now we realize that it would help to let the user choose for the above mentioned reasons. But, that will make one more decision the user has to get confused with, so we need to do it right if we want to offer the same type of choice as the iPod photo does.
Making things simple is so flipping hard. When I first discussed this resolution issue with my boss, he stumped me in two seconds because he’s so in tune with usability issues. I didn’t bring it up for a long time, I was so stuck.
Well, all I can say, since the decision is not really mine, is that we are still trying to find a nice way to give some choice. Of course, you could pipe up and let me know what you think. I promise to discard all the comments that don’t support my view so that I can go back and get what I want.
Just kidding.
Hardware should be configured in that way that it could handle both megapixel photos or even 2.1 megapixel photos wothout any hardship…
There lies the problem..If this is improving/improved you wouldn’t think about choosing between low res/high res..
indeed.
I think it’s always best to work in the high-res photos, even when transfering back to the phone, as otherwise you might get the situation where you need to transfer back to the computer and end up with 2 different formats.
It’s also confusing for the non-tech user to have photos on the phone which appear the same quality on the phone screen, but display different when viewed or transfered elsewhere (eg via MMS, MMC-card-reader, e-mail).
Frankie
Frankie,
Yes, there can easily be a mix up if the user edits the low-res on the phone… The iPod avoids this because it’s entirely passive.
Tchau,
Charlie