From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Arno Welzel wrote:

Please to Test my apk at google play store

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=pl.jakub1.photo

I understand, that you want to explore app development. But there are
plenty of Camera apps - also open source ones like this: <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.sourceforge.opencamera> <https://f-droid.org/packages/net.sourceforge.opencamera/>
Source: <https://sourceforge.net/p/opencamera/code/ci/master/tree/>

When I had tested, oh, I don't know, scores or more of free camera apps,
the one thing I'd like to see in Jakub's camera app is the ability to
switch between flash & no flash in a simple on:off:on:off:on:off toggle.

It has been years since I've tested all known free camera apps, but that's
the one feature that I wanted most in a camera app. A simple flash on/off.

Other than that, the next thing I want in a camera app is a simple button
that sets the camera to a known set of settings instantly without fuss. Far
too many times I find myself digging into the settings to reset something.

But back to the flash button, it's shocking to me that a simple on:off
flash is so hard to find in a camera app. Nobody thinks about the GUI. :(
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Marian, 2025-12-03 00:01:

[...]

But back to the flash button, it's shocking to me that a simple on:off
flash is so hard to find in a camera app. Nobody thinks about the GUI. :(

I think one issue is the number of controls in the UI - when adding more controls, it gets harder to use since you may accidentally tap a button.
That may be the reason why even the Google camera app in Pixel phones
hides the flash option in a submenu.

But otherwise - since Open Camera is open source, everyone is free to
add this in the UI and create a pull request for it.
--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Arno Welzel wrote:

But back to the flash button, it's shocking to me that a simple on:off
flash is so hard to find in a camera app. Nobody thinks about the GUI. :(

I think one issue is the number of controls in the UI - when adding more controls, it gets harder to use since you may accidentally tap a button.
That may be the reason why even the Google camera app in Pixel phones
hides the flash option in a submenu.

But otherwise - since Open Camera is open source, everyone is free to
add this in the UI and create a pull request for it.

I never disagree with any logically sensible viewpoint, which is that
camera apps start to get complicated and then even easy stuff is hard to
do.

But the flash...

The flash...

Every camera app has a flash.

It's shocking to me it's not just on:off for the controls.

IMHO, it should be off, and then when you tap it, it should be on.
If you tap it again, it should go off. And if you tap again, it goes on.

Shockingly, that's NOT how most flash controls work.
Do you know of any camera app whose flash works the way I want it to work?

This is my main recommendation to the OP.
Set up the flash to be single touch binary.

If it's on, then a tap shuts it off.
If it's off, then a tap turns it on.

What's so hard about that?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Arlen,

If it's on, then a tap shuts it off.
If it's off, then a tap turns it on.

What's so hard about that?

https://thedailywtf.com/articles/The_Big_Red_Button

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-12-05 03:33, Marian wrote:

IMHO, it should be off, and then when you tap it, it should be on.
If you tap it again, it should go off. And if you tap again, it goes on.

Mine is tap flash, then choose auto, off, or on. It makes perfect sense
to me.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Carlos E.R. wrote:

IMHO, it should be off, and then when you tap it, it should be on.
If you tap it again, it should go off. And if you tap again, it goes on.

Mine is tap flash, then choose auto, off, or on. It makes perfect sense
to me.

Hi Carlos,

Thanks for explaining how your camera app flash works, which is how most
work, so I agree with your characterization of how most app flashes work.

My point is to the developer who is asking us to test his camera app.
My point is for him to strongly consider an on:off:on:off:on:off flash.

The way I'd recommend he set it up, is he'd have in "Settings" a switch for
SimpleFlashGUI=yes/no

If the user wants the simple flash GUI described above, they set it to yes.
If they want the GUI you described (which most camera apps do), they leave
it at the default.

Remember, I'm one of the few people on this ng who have tested every single free adfree camera app known to the group, where that's the one feature I
found lacking in almost all of them.

It's why I suggested it to the OP who is a developer of a camera app.
He can add it and then his camera app is DIFFERENTIATED from the others.

Everybody wins.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Marian, 2025-12-05 03:33:

[...]

But the flash...

The flash...

Every camera app has a flash.

It's shocking to me it's not just on:off for the controls.

Because there are multiple options for it:

- off
- always on
- automatic if needed

And sometimes also additional features like filling flash or open or
closing flash. When you are used to "real" cameras, you know, that a
flash is not just a simple "on/off".
--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Arno Welzel wrote:

It's shocking to me it's not just on:off for the controls.

Because there are multiple options for it:

- off
- always on
- automatic if needed

And sometimes also additional features like filling flash or open or
closing flash. When you are used to "real" cameras, you know, that a
flash is not just a simple "on/off".

Oh, I get it. I worked in the Silicon Valley on software that costs
millions per seat, so I'm fully aware how software developers think.

Since I have tested all the known free camera apps for Android, I'm well
aware of how the flash GUI works because very few people actually think
about reducing clicks.

All I'm suggesting to the developer is he have the option of a "simple"
mode where the flash goes on or off or back on and off with each tap.

The default can still be the multiple-tap mode to turn a switch on. :)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Marian, 2025-12-12 18:24:

Arno Welzel wrote:

It's shocking to me it's not just on:off for the controls.

Because there are multiple options for it:

- off
- always on
- automatic if needed

And sometimes also additional features like filling flash or open or
closing flash. When you are used to "real" cameras, you know, that a
flash is not just a simple "on/off".

Oh, I get it. I worked in the Silicon Valley on software that costs
millions per seat, so I'm fully aware how software developers think.

That's not "how software developers think". Real cameras work this way.
Did you ever use a real camera?
--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-12-15, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:

Marian, 2025-12-12 18:24:

Arno Welzel wrote:

It's shocking to me it's not just on:off for the controls.

Because there are multiple options for it:

- off
- always on
- automatic if needed

And sometimes also additional features like filling flash or open or
closing flash. When you are used to "real" cameras, you know, that a
flash is not just a simple "on/off".

Oh, I get it. I worked in the Silicon Valley on software that costs
millions per seat, so I'm fully aware how software developers think.

That's not "how software developers think". Real cameras work this way.
Did you ever use a real camera?

Thing is an awefull lot of phone camera users never used a "real" camera
- a point and shoot instamatic or similar. "real" camera users are a
minority. Very often having a simple mode, and an option for expert mode
where lots of "real" things happen is often the best way to go.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Jim Jackson, 2025-12-18 21:26:

On 2025-12-15, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:

Marian, 2025-12-12 18:24:

Arno Welzel wrote:

It's shocking to me it's not just on:off for the controls.

Because there are multiple options for it:

- off
- always on
- automatic if needed

And sometimes also additional features like filling flash or open or
closing flash. When you are used to "real" cameras, you know, that a
flash is not just a simple "on/off".

Oh, I get it. I worked in the Silicon Valley on software that costs
millions per seat, so I'm fully aware how software developers think.

That's not "how software developers think". Real cameras work this way.
Did you ever use a real camera?

Thing is an awefull lot of phone camera users never used a "real" camera
- a point and shoot instamatic or similar. "real" camera users are a minority. Very often having a simple mode, and an option for expert mode where lots of "real" things happen is often the best way to go.

Even a piint and shoot camera has more settings than just "flash on" and
"flash off". At least an automatic mode to use flash only if needed is
often available.
--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-12-19, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:

Jim Jackson, 2025-12-18 21:26:

On 2025-12-15, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:

Marian, 2025-12-12 18:24:

Arno Welzel wrote:

It's shocking to me it's not just on:off for the controls.

Because there are multiple options for it:

- off
- always on
- automatic if needed

And sometimes also additional features like filling flash or open or >>>>> closing flash. When you are used to "real" cameras, you know, that a >>>>> flash is not just a simple "on/off".

Oh, I get it. I worked in the Silicon Valley on software that costs
millions per seat, so I'm fully aware how software developers think.

That's not "how software developers think". Real cameras work this way.
Did you ever use a real camera?

Thing is an awefull lot of phone camera users never used a "real" camera
- a point and shoot instamatic or similar. "real" camera users are a
minority. Very often having a simple mode, and an option for expert mode
where lots of "real" things happen is often the best way to go.

Even a piint and shoot camera has more settings than just "flash on" and "flash off". At least an automatic mode to use flash only if needed is
often available.

Indeed with cheap automatics, that was often the only option. It often
wasn't important to get absolute "correct" exposure, the film processing
and printing shops often could auto-correct a stop or two when printing.

Another point is that flash teneded to be needed in more situations with
film.
<contraversial> Modern digital sensors have way better low light
performance than most films did </contraversial> :-)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Jim Jackson wrote:

<contraversial> Modern digital sensors have way better low light
performance than most films did </contraversial> :-)

My first camera, oh, it was in the 1960s, was an East German all-metal 35mm SLR, with this black 'leather-like' pigskin-like leatherette covering on
the heavy metal which was peeling off at the edges.

Manual everything!

It was an immersive experience adjusting every shot to the ISO, aperture,
and shutter speed by hand. You really *felt* every decision you made in the final image.

Cellphone cameras no longer need such attention anymore, but they don't
give our grandkids that same tactile sense of crafting the exposure from scratch.

They now craft their exposure using AI after the fact.

It's kind of like how cars changed, where we changed the points every year
and replaced the capacitor and checked the dwell & timing, and now, none of that is needed for the life of the car.

I still mount and balance my own tires at home though, since I'm old school
(I use the cheap HF bead breaker, tire mounter & static balancing jigs).

Am I the only one left?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 12/23/25 1:01 PM, Marian wrote:

Jim Jackson wrote:

<contraversial> Modern digital sensors have way better low light
performance than most films did </contraversial> :-)

My first camera, oh, it was in the 1960s, was an East German all-metal 35mm >SLR, with this black 'leather-like' pigskin-like leatherette covering on
the heavy metal which was peeling off at the edges.

Manual everything!

It was an immersive experience adjusting every shot to the ISO, aperture,
and shutter speed by hand. You really *felt* every decision you made in the >final image.

Cellphone cameras no longer need such attention anymore, but they don't
give our grandkids that same tactile sense of crafting the exposure from >scratch.

They now craft their exposure using AI after the fact.

It's kind of like how cars changed, where we changed the points every year >and replaced the capacitor and checked the dwell & timing, and now, none of >that is needed for the life of the car.

I replaced a few vibrators. Remember where they were?

I still mount and balance my own tires at home though, since I'm old school >(I use the cheap HF bead breaker, tire mounter & static balancing jigs).

Am I the only one left?

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

AJL wrote:

It's kind of like how cars changed, where we changed the points every year >>and replaced the capacitor and checked the dwell & timing, and now, none of >>that is needed for the life of the car.

I replaced a few vibrators. Remember where they were?

It's not a term I learned in auto shop, but they didn't teach us how to
work on the radios in the dashboard.

It's only when I became an electrical engineer that I learned how to step
up low voltage DC to high voltage AC and then Wheatstone it back to DC.

About the only thing today in engine bays even close to the golden era of
US automobiles is, oh, maybe the cooling system is essentially unchanged.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2