Direct camera to iPod wire transfer (Firewire or USB2.0)

[Ceroc Addict]

The camera and the iPod are slave USB devices.

To transfer from the camera to the iPod, the camera must become the master. I agree it should be part of the software of expensive camera.

?

Why couldn't the iPod be the master (i.e. pretend it was iPhoto) and suck pictures from the camera?

Kap

[quiksan]

With the release of the iPod Photo, the topic of this thread seems to be the killer feature that Apple missed.

as soon as I read that an iPod Photo had been released, the first feature I hoped to find upon reading Apple's product page, was a direct digi cam connection for downloading (temp storage or whatever) all your recent pics, to free up the camera's storage. c'mon, it's the obvious move isn't it?

my cousin recently took a trip to Europe with his new Canon 10D, and brought that goofy Belkin transfer thing to download to his ipod. it didn't work too well. think he had to track down a bunch of new cards, and manage the shots he took, instead of keeping them all to sort out later.

I could have rationalized the 499 or 599 price tag if this kind of function had been built-in by apple, but there's no way I'd get it otherwise. too bad.

[brianleahy]

Why couldn't the iPod be the master (i.e. pretend it was iPhoto) and suck pictures from the camera?

Perhaps it could, but there are two issues.

First, the iPod would still need to be a slave device for connection to a Mac. You can't just have it switch to master mode when it 'sees' other slave devices on the USB port, because then it would get terribly confused when connecting to a Mac or PC via a USB hub. However, you could perhaps include a menu choice on the iPod to switch between master & slave mode.

Second, with USB in particular, there is a difference between the master & slave ends of the cable. The jack on the end of the iPod's USB cable fits into a Mac or PC USB port, but will NOT fit into the USB port on a camera. A different cable, or adapter, would be needed.

On a related note: Most Canon digital cameras can be connected directly to a special Canon USB photo printer. USB printers are normally slave devices, but this model knows how to be a Master. On the camera, you select pictures you want to print and then press a 'print' button on the camera to initiate the printout.

Perhaps:
A) iPod Photos can be enabled to also interface with these Canon printers
B) With some iPod software changes, this interface could be used to copy individual photos between Canon CAMERAS and iPod Photo

EDIT: previously said 'between Canon printers and iPod Photo' --not what I meant!

[quiksan]

brian:
I don't want to deal with the logistics of it, I just want it to work!

yeah, there are enough hurdles that the current form factor might need a change (an additional port, etc). hmmmm.

well regardless, I still think the iPod Photo platform would have been that ideal opportunity to jump into that functionality (whatever the logistical issues may be)...maybe in an update someday...

[fryke]

There probably is also a lobby that wants to sell memory sticks, CF cards, SD cards etc. And the iPod would erase this market, basically, since it's TERRIBLY cheap compared to those cards. So I think it might not be in the best interest of many camera makers to enable such a support.

For the user, though, it'd be great, yes...

Ceterum censeo Apple should build a stereo microphone into the iPod - or at least allow a stereo mic add-on. (The ones available are mono only.)

[Ceroc Addict]

With the release of the iPod Photo, the topic of this thread seems to be the killer feature that Apple missed.

Exactly.

The iPod Photo is an expensive joke, because it misses out on the two things that people actually want to do most with their photos while on the move:

• Store a lot of pictures until they can transfer them to a laptop/CD/DVD (esp. when travelling) i.e. Transfer photos from their camera directly to the iPod (with an absolute minimum of fuss and extra weight)
• Share their photos with other people (again, esp. when travelling) i.e. "That's a great photo, can I get a copy (now)?"

When I did a Contiki trip across Europe a couple of years ago, I travelled with 50 other people. We all took 10+ rolls of photos each. I didn't own a digital camera at the time, but what I wouldn't have given to have been able to store all my digital pictures and share them (and get the pictures of the others in the group) while on tour!

I'm going to attend a Ceroc ball tomorrow. I'll be taking my Powerbook so everyone attending there will be able to upload their photos to it on the night. What I wouldn't give to be able to just bring an iPod (for the extra cost/hassle of using Belkin's media card reader, I might as well use my Powerbook directly).

etc., etc..

I'm not going to buy an iPod Photo. If I want to show someone a slideshow, I'll burn a $1 CD.

Kap

[brianleahy]

If iPod Photos (and Belkin iPod Media Readers) sell well, Apple may eventually do what they have done many times before; incorporate the functionality of a popular 3rd-party product into their own product line.

[fryke]

Usually, they've done that in _software_ though.