Colour-coded PCB photos


65 posts   Page 3 of 3   1, 2, 3
by jbeale » Mon May 21, 2012 11:15 pm
RAW formats do give you more flexibility for tweaking exposure and color. There are some free tools that work with RAW, for example Rawtherapee http://rawtherapee.com/ and UFRaw http://ufraw.sourceforge.net/ but there's some learning curve with these, and it might be overkill if the JPEG is already usable. Yes, getting all the different chip markings readable at once can be a real bear; low-angle illumination from the sides, and a long-focus macro lens is a good starting point, at least that's what I use for this kind of work.

Anyway, I see the images here http://elinux.org/images/7/76/Raspberry-pi-top.jpg and http://elinux.org/images/b/b8/Raspberry-pi-bottom.jpg are really quite detailed, and I probably could not offer much more, whenever I do get my Pi to photograph. Darn, so that means I'll have to actually do some programming, in order to be useful :-)
User avatar
Posts: 1885
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:51 pm
by alexeames » Tue May 22, 2012 6:32 am
AndrewS wrote:Brilliant, I think we have a winner! :D
I wouldn't even begin to know what to do with a RAW file. ;) I'm a programmer, not a graphic designer.


OK fair enough. I use the free Nikon ViewNX 2 to manipulate RAW files. If you shoot RAW you can process them on your computer instead of the camera deciding all the settings. Then when it looks as you want, you convert to jpg. The trouble with tweaking jpgs is that you lose information. With RAW, you don't.

Anyway - I'm happy if you're happy with what we have. :D I look forward to seeing what you do with it.
My Pi uses 2 watts - what what? ---- HiRes early production Pi photos RS Front Back | Farnell Front Back
User avatar
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 11:57 am
Location: UK
by rew » Wed May 23, 2012 5:23 am
The compression "losses" in "JPG" isn't the problem.
The problem is that the camera converts the raw sensor data to standard RGB colorspace using the "whitebalance" setting. I left my whitebalance on some "inside" setting again, and didn't notice. I now have a bunch of weird-bluish photographs. These would've been 100% recoverable if I'd shot them in "raw".
Check out our raspberry pi addons: http://www.bitwizard.nl/catalog/
User avatar
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 3:25 pm
by alexeames » Wed May 23, 2012 7:23 am
rew wrote:The compression "losses" in "JPG" isn't the problem.
The problem is that the camera converts the raw sensor data to standard RGB colorspace using the "whitebalance" setting. I left my whitebalance on some "inside" setting again, and didn't notice. I now have a bunch of weird-bluish photographs. These would've been 100% recoverable if I'd shot them in "raw".


That's part of it, but I was under the impression that, for example, sharpening and many other adjustments lose information if you work in JPG and it is much better to shoot RAW and do all such tweaks on that - then you're only processing the file once. If you shoot JPG it's already been processed. JPG is great if you are a good photographer and know exactly what you're doing and how to set up the camera to get what you want. I've not achieved that happy place, so I nearly always shoot RAW. :)
My Pi uses 2 watts - what what? ---- HiRes early production Pi photos RS Front Back | Farnell Front Back
User avatar
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 11:57 am
Location: UK
by alexeames » Fri May 25, 2012 3:33 pm
Farnell Pi showed up today. I've tried to take shots under as similar conditions as I could to the RS one. Both full res shots uploaded to the Wiki and linked in my Signature. :D
My Pi uses 2 watts - what what? ---- HiRes early production Pi photos RS Front Back | Farnell Front Back
User avatar
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 11:57 am
Location: UK
by AndrewS » Fri May 25, 2012 5:29 pm
Wow! No PCB "batch number" and an entirely different RAM chip! Any other differences you've noticed?

EDIT: My mistake, the batch number has moved to the back - "1218"
User avatar
Posts: 2193
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:50 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK
by alexeames » Fri May 25, 2012 5:38 pm
AndrewS wrote:Wow! No PCB "batch number" and an entirely different RAM chip! Any other differences you've noticed?

EDIT: My mistake, the batch number has moved to the back - "1218"


The 19.2 MHz crystal looks different and says Japan on it. The composite plug is crooked on the latest one. :lol:
Not spotted any other differences.

Oh yes. One more thing. The row of holes next to P2 have been filled on the Farnell model. On the RS they are still holes.
My Pi uses 2 watts - what what? ---- HiRes early production Pi photos RS Front Back | Farnell Front Back
User avatar
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 11:57 am
Location: UK
by AndrewS » Fri May 25, 2012 6:00 pm
Found the product page for the new RAM chip, and added a link on http://elinux.org/RPi_Hardware#Components :geek:
User avatar
Posts: 2193
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:50 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK
by SN » Fri May 25, 2012 6:02 pm
alexeames wrote:Oh yes. One more thing. The row of holes next to P2 have been filled on the Farnell model. On the RS they are still holes.

I think the holes filled is pot luck, both of mine came from Farnell, both stamped 1215 ...
BUT, Pi 1 FN 120509xxx has complete set of clear holes
And Pi 2 FN 120520xxx has 6 of the 7 filled with solder (one furthest from audio port is clear)

You can just see it below
Image
Steve N – binatone mk4->intellivision->zx81->spectrum->cbm64->cpc6128->520stfm->pc->raspi ?
User avatar
Posts: 1008
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 8:06 pm
Location: Romiley, UK
by jbeale » Fri May 25, 2012 6:12 pm
RS: no FCC mark, and "CE" is a clear adhesive label. Farnell: FCC mark on a clear sticker (confusing visually as it is applied over the PCB fab info), and the "CE" mark has made it to the silkscreen layer.

RS version also has slightly more white spots (flux residue) visible on backside, but that may be a function of the lighting. Either way it should not make any functional difference.
Last edited by jbeale on Fri May 25, 2012 6:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Posts: 1885
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:51 pm
by AndrewS » Fri May 25, 2012 6:14 pm
SN wrote:both of mine came from Farnell

How did you manage that?!

I wonder why they're still bothering to fit P2 anyway? :|
User avatar
Posts: 2193
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:50 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK
by AndrewS » Sun May 27, 2012 4:05 pm
Received my Pi from Farnell yesterday :) (but was too busy to play with it until today)
It's a "1215" date-stamp PCB, it has the 'new' Samsung chip, the 'old' 19.2MHz crystal, both CE and FCC stickers on the back, and a crooked composite jack.
I.e. as expected the "1215" PCBs have a mixture of features of both the "1213" and "1218" PCBs ;)
And on this particular Pi, two of the P3 holes are solder-filled.
Unfortunately I can't take any pictures as I accidentally left my camera at my mum's when I was visiting last weekend! :(
User avatar
Posts: 2193
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:50 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK
by jbeale » Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:48 am
I'm a little late to the party, but just in case of interest, here is a view of the bottom side of my new R-Pi. I think the full res photo shows a useful amount of detail. it is a composite image so there may be artifacts but so far I have only found one, a slight change in the brightness of a silkscreen box area in one region at upper right. http://elinux.org/File:RPi-back-JPB.jpg
User avatar
Posts: 1885
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:51 pm
by alexeames » Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:16 pm
Nice magnification jbeale :) Good shot sir.
My Pi uses 2 watts - what what? ---- HiRes early production Pi photos RS Front Back | Farnell Front Back
User avatar
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 11:57 am
Location: UK
by marcoalexcampos » Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:00 am
Maybe this is a bit off topic (apologies), but since I see allot of you have taken good pictures of your boards, and are looking closely to figure out the diferences, I'd like to invite you all to post your info on this page: http://elinux.org/RaspberryPi_Boards#Hardware_versions.2Frevisions

This will help troubleshoot since we'll be able to pin-point our specific board "version".

If you don't know how to edit this page, just send me an email with the photos (high resolution if possible) and the data, and I'll post for your. <mcampos@marcocampos.com>

Thank you. :)
User avatar
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 2:45 pm