[Tony Belding]

I couldn't resist picking up one of these cookie-cams:



I'm not sure why it's called a "biscuit" when it obviously looks like a cookie? This is not to be confused with the earlier Fuuvi Biscuit camera that was shaped like a sort of rectangular wafer and had badly outdated specifications. No, this is the new improved cookie-cam! It has a USB 2.0 cable (non-standard) for charging and image transfer, accepts a Micro SD card (not included), and can record SD video or take 3 MP photos! (That's 2048 X 1536, to be specific.) On the back there's a tiny alpha-numeric LCD that merely indicates how many shots you've taken. Composition is through the "optical viewfinder", a simple and nearly useless non-magnifying window. There are only two controls: a shutter button and the on/off/mode button which turns the camera on or switches between photo and video. (It doesn't actually *work* for turning the camera off, but if you don't touch the controls it'll shut itself down after 30 seconds anyhow.)

The specifications of this camera are far below almost any point-and-shoot, or even the cheapest phone camera. However, it does have one overwhelming advantage, and I can't emphasize this enough: It looks like a cookie!

Enough talk, let's look at the output. . .









As you can see, this camera has almost everything for the Lomographer: blur everywhere, framing by guesswork, blown highlights, ridiculous white balance, horrible low-light performance. Actually, now that I think of it, I don't see much evidence of vignetting -- but I guess they had to leave something for us to add in post?

[VisualDarkness]

That looks like a Q body cap lens roaming free without a Q

[rawr]

Not bad output. Run the images through a few filters/ VSCO etc, Instagram them, success.

[maart.e]

I envy you that yours work. My biscuit camera never worked.