Is the L5 camera another work in progress? I have spent the afternoon searching that to no avail.
Pics I get are dark & psychedelic. The “Torch” is a dull yellow and camera has to be up close using dim-yellow.
Pic is with
the camera has made significant progress,
see: https://adamd.sdf.org/computers/mini/2023/01/02/L5CameraControlsUpdate.html
The update is not yet final and not in the repository.
At the moment there is no flash integrated, you could turn on the flashlight.
Note the name of the application displayed under its icon in the app grid: Camera (Dev Preview), as well as the yellow and black striping across the icon. That indicates that it’s not refined yet.
Search for “camera” or “millipixels” (the former name of this app) in the forum and you’ll find one or two guides on how to use the controls at the top of the camera screen. It can take decent photos, especially outdoors.
Also, @dos wrote an excellent blog post about using the camera, which you can find on Purism’s main site.
And actually, there are several videos with transcripts on the blog, made by @david.hamner, which you might find helpful, about using the phone in general. 
I think the OP’s point is that the Librem 5 is sold as: "… Upon initial shipment of the Librem 5, it will offer the essentials: phone functionality, email, messaging, voice, camera, browsing. " and the camera is described as “13 Mpx with flash LED”.
The OP asked:
I think the answer to the OP’s question is simply a “Yes. Purism has not yet integrated ‘flash’ into the camera application”. There should not be any implicit blame directed toward the OP in regard to the OP’s expectations (e.g. where you point out that the Camera app is a Dev Preview). Clearly if one is buying the Librem 5 based on the advertisements, they should count this as one of those disappointments.
2 Likes
There isn’t, blame has only been inferred.
1 Like
And actually, there are several videos with transcripts on the blog, made by @david.hamner, which you might find helpful, about using the phone in general.
[/quote]
What the!!! Now it’s another video. No one should have to watch a video to discover just what will work! Question. Can I watch videos on the device. It’s not a phone - yet. It’s not a camera - yet. Will it play music? Not if there is no icon - right? Or, as finally mentioned, has yellow and black stripes. SERIOUSLY We are supposed to know that! Half A Day Yesterday reading to get the flash to operate.
So what we have here is a failure, to ah communicate what this really is.
Please - a link to a list (not video) that tells me what it can do at this time so I don’t wast another half day trying to get something to work that is crippled to begin with!!
The light, it’s called a “torch” is a dim yellow. FYI Prui, dim yellow doesn’t even light anything more than 1 meter away.
I’d upload a sample but this thing does not want to cooperate with dumping files to a computer. I knew it, that’s why I bought a 64G card for it. And, as pointed out camera doesn’t work yet.
Any idea what it will cost to buy into a working camera for this device? I don’t mean buy a camera I have to plug in, I mean the one I paid for - the one inside the device.
There is NO “flashlight” The “flash”, is more like a snuffed candle, has a very dim yellow light. So, wrong, I cannot use the candle/torch. This device is good clock though. Dim Yellow has a long way to go to be a flash - or torch for that matter. My hall nightlight is brighter than this.
Court adjourned?
You can just read the transcripts posted with the videos:
I was thinking you could search for the info on your computer.
The bugs and kinks you’ve encountered are surely frustrating, as you justifiably point out. I hope you can get those fixed ASAP, because I think you might really like the Librem 5 phone(/computer) once you do.
Sorry if my answers to your various questions on this and other issues, or if my directing you to previous threads haven’t helped. If I were in Vancouver, I would offer to help you in person over public wifi somewhere, because I hate to see you so exasperated.
So, maybe it’s time to deal directly with Purism support for either answers/instructions or a return of a possibly defective L5. (Or maybe other forum members can provide more relevant help.)
Peace out!
I said “implicit blame”. Do you know what “implicit blame” means? It basically means blame that can be inferred. There absolutely was “implicit blame” cast and it shouldn’t be there.
Sort of. It literally means blame is implied. The difference is an implication is attributed to the speaker and an inference is attributed to the listener. I’m saying it wasn’t implied, but rather that you’re inferring it. There’s no evidence that Amarok was casting any blame. You’re making a subjective and, frankly, unfair judgment.
And yes, I’m being subjective in saying the implication wasn’t there, but I’d rather presume innocence than guilt, particularly given his/her history on this forum.
I mentioned it that I would look everywhere else before I ask a question here and only because I could not find, or understand the fixes. The only thing I feel I want to read is how much I’ll lose sending it back for parts. I know it will be a near total loss.
But, at least you responded. No one in particular was targeted about links to volumes of reading. It’s reading it all, then following the steps up to the point it says ‘Tap blue button’ (example) and ‘button’ isn’t there. Or, I have problems with the instructions, only to find out later that the feature I was not available.
I tried that, I still have a few pages to read. But there were a few links I already read.
Don’t feel like you have to help. If you have a answer, I’ll read it.
I’m not in Vancouver Washington or Vancouver BC. No VPN either.
c’est la vie
~s
Where is your location? Maybe there is someone near you who can help.
You could be the founding CEO of the Canadian Librem 5 Users Group. 
I disagree. The implication was completely clear to me. Mansplaining. As a reminder, in response to a yes/no question (“Is the L5 camera another work in progress?”), amarok delivered this:
If one isn’t meaning to blame the OP, a simple “Yes” or “No” suffices to answer the question. Instead Amarok delivered a “here’s why you should have known the answer” bit of victim blaming.
This is offensive misandry.
No, rather pointed out a perhaps-overlooked detail. You asserting your interpretation is putting words in the speaker’s mouth and attributing -your- thought process to the speaker, as evidenced by you saying “the implication was completely clear to me” in addition to the accusation of “mansplaining”.
I won’t deal with your sexist, self-righteous lack of empathy any further.
4 Likes
Please tone it down a notch, guys.
3 Likes
It is the appropriate word for the situation regardless of whether amarok is a man and/or sharon is a woman. Here’s the definition:
Mansplaining = the explanation of something by a man, typically to a woman, in a manner regarded as condescending or patronizing.
If you can’t deal with the appropriate use of a word, that’s really your problem. Hint: mansplain was added to the OED in 2014 (online) and 2017/2018 (official).
Come on. Stop it. Even if a word has an accepted definition and even if you’re using it correctly doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea to use it.
2 Likes