Related
hi all i have taken about 4hours today testing the camera to the end of my will, now i hope this thread will help other and i intend to include pics of every content and do a full review of the htc hd2 camera but here's a few samples while i get the review on the way
TIPS FOR BETTER PICTURES
- turn off wide-screen in the settings for true 5mp, if u have it on u get lower res Normal screen = 2592 x 1944 / Wide-screen = 2592 x 1552
- set white balance to the sunny settings in all condition not auto or u will get weird colors with most of ur pics (see samples below)
SAMPLE PICTURES UNEDITED - 5mp + very fine mode + touch focus + sunny (not auto whitebalance)
click for full res, untouched quality
the above pics where static objects great focus
now to compare auto whitebalance to sunny none auto setting all pics still full res, untouched quality
auto settings -------/------- sunny setting
the above pics where static objects great focus
auto settings -------/------- sunny setting
the above pics where static objects great focus
auto settings -------/------- sunny setting
the above pics where is moving objects focus had issues here
auto settings -------/------- sunny setting
the above pics where static objects great focus also high light levels
SAMPLE VIDEOS UNEDITED - 640x480 + MPEG4 + sunny setting + touch focus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtJ5d6BPhwA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxdNl0r54Jg
my kid kindly became the model for these lol
EDIT: for people are unsure about the realness of these pics please download the originals here, just look at the image properties for proof
heres originals for extra proof
http://rapidshare.com/files/307497596/DCIM.zip.html
Thanks for your samples....
...the pictures seem to show a great deal of sharpening on them. Did you apply that in post-prod, or is it done automatically in-camera?
Also, as soon as I get my HD2 (which has been stuck in a post office all week-end... grrrr!!!!!), I will try to take a reference picture of a netural gray card, and then subtract it from real-life photos using photoshop. This should really get rid of the magenta color cast in the middle of each photo, though it would be a pain to have to do this extra step for each picture one wishes to keep...
Purely amazing? For me these look barely usable, but then I'm coming from an i8910, so I guess it depends on what you're used to...
If those are unusable then I'd like to see the pics the i8910 can produce, as to me the top pictures in macro mode look pretty good for a HTC camera
EDIT: Ok so for fun I decided to look up what the i8910 can do and ....wow!
Oh well, I rarely take pics with a phone so the HTC camera will have to make do
Those who come from WM phones the HD2 produces some of the best images and videos. At least there is a substantial improvement from the predecessor Touch HD.
Coming from the best camera phones from Nokia, Samsung, Sony Ericsson etc. the quality is just passable.
...the pictures seem to show a great deal of sharpening on them. Did you apply that in post-prod, or is it done automatically in-camera?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no i assure u their all unedited pics, heres proof look at info at bottem of pic at picture info,
heres originals for extra proof
http://rapidshare.com/files/307497596/DCIM.zip.html
If those are unusable then I'd like to see the pics the i8910 can produce, as to me the top pictures in macro mode look pretty good for a HTC camera
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the htc hd2 has not got a micro mode touch focus is what i used for all pics
You can compare some macro shots to this example:
Samsung i8910 OmniaHD
http://symbianworld.org/1541-macro-pictures-taken-with-the-samsung-i8910-omnia-hd/
ez2remember said:
You can compare some macro shots to this example:
Samsung i8910 OmniaHD
http://symbianworld.org/1541-macro-pictures-taken-with-the-samsung-i8910-omnia-hd/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hi mate some pointers,
1) Samsung i8910 OmniaHD = 8mp camera and omnia camera are good
2) we need to see full unedited pics to compare noise
good pics though
For me it looks like the HD2 Camera-App uses very agressive noise-reducing. Thats why Pictures look more fuzzy with lack of fine details.
Some users tell that this can be avoided by increasing the sharpnes in the camera-settings.
Please, some HD2 retail user can do this and post some more pictures here?
Yes that is true but megapixels only tells half the story, it's mostly down to the quality of the lens. I could find you similar examples taken with a 5MPx camera from Nokia...
Anyway here are much larger images. They're not full size but I doubt you'll find much noise in these images.
http://forum2.mobile-review.com/showthread.php?t=81427&page=31
Scroll to about mid point.
They might be a big improvement for a HTC device, but they are very much inferior to the photos from my old N95, or even my original Fuji 3MP digital camera.
Photos from an i8910 or a Satio are in a completely different league.
Still, I guess I should be grateful that HTC have made some improvement in this area, and I'm not actually buying the phone for it's photo taking ability.
Bagpuss.
For me it looks like the HD2 Camera-App uses very agressive noise-reducing. Thats why Pictures look more fuzzy with lack of fine details.
Some users tell that this can be avoided by increasing the sharpnes in the camera-settings.
Please, some HD2 retail user can do this and post some more pictures here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i have a retail version what would u like images of
Yes that is true but megapixels only tells half the story, it's mostly down to the quality of the lens. I could find you similar examples taken with a 5MPx camera from Nokia...
Anyway here are much larger images. They're not full size but I doubt you'll find much noise in these images.
http://forum2.mobile-review.com/show...=81427&page=31
Scroll to about mid point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
very nice indead
Red tint in center
I notice a red tint in every sample pictures or videos taken with HD2 (I don't have one, seeing samples). Is this true or I need an eye check?
Amazing?
This pics looks like ****. At 100% have a lot of noise, bad colors and a constant pink tint in the center of the screen.
The camera of the HD2 is a really disaster like all the others of HTC.
Still though, they show improvement from previous HTC outings, for which I'm grateful.
geo tagging
Hi guys, I can't find the settings to turn geo tagging on when taking pictures, is it not possible with this phone?
Im talking about embeding location data on the image exif, I use to have nokia phones in the past, n96, n82, n95..
footprints is neat but I don't see it adding gps information on to the photo,
example of this use is when you upload images to flickr the gps location shows up on flickr.
any info on this appriciated
I think if you check the tweaks thread there is a post about turning on Geotagging.
If its not there try searching, I know I've seen at post on this in the last couple of days.
EDIT: Its in the tips thread (now stickied).
hi their focus is weird as touch focus is on which activates (spot focus) so u will notice because that the middle of the pics are focused and the rest isnt as the pics where at such close distance to the object, i will try and show the other focus modes soon
ez2remember said:
Those who come from WM phones the HD2 produces some of the best images and videos. At least there is a substantial improvement from the predecessor Touch HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely FALSE. Pictures taken with TouchHD are by far sharper and with much better definition for details. Just take a look at those shots:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jasonhsutuna/3073258639/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jasonhsutuna/3074092562/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jasonhsutuna/3073257803/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aldovanzeeland/3334947533/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aldovanzeeland/3579556212/sizes/l/
And then.. take a look at this picture taken by the HD2.. utterly blurred, just look at the trees..
http://img252.imageshack.us/i/imag0021l.jpg/
I suppose, however, that part of the problem can be overcome by just removing the plastic protection from the front of the camera.. like we did with HTC Kaiser...
DAMIEN123_666 said:
i have a retail version what would u like images of
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello DAMIEN123_666,
Please increasing the sharpness in your camera-settings (or set it to maximun sharpness)
And then take some pictures in good light condition with a lot of detail (maybe like the picture with the trees)
I would apreciate a lot if you would do that for us.
Eraser85 said:
Absolutely FALSE. Pictures taken with TouchHD are by far sharper and with much better definition for details.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, thats true for the moment and the given sample pics - i cannot belive that the TouchHD cam is bether.
I hope it is only a question of the sharpness setting!
I notice if I take a picture from my already snapped pics taken at full resolution max quality the stock messaging app will compress the pic all the way down to 5kb and a ridiculously small resolution. However if I set the camera to 1mp or so it doesn't reside because it falls under the 1MB size limit.
I love the fact that it has the ability to compress the image , but its just a taaaaad too aggressive with the compression lol.
How can I toy with this? I don't even know what apk does the resizing, or if its in a script file somewhere.
I'm not happy with Handcent or Chomp. I have nothing against the stock app. It works fine as far as im concerned, other than this tiny bug.
If this is not an option is there a photo editing app that does compression? I have Pic Say Pro but I don't think it does custom compression.
Id like to be able to resize the pics to say 1024x768 (or whatever the widescreen equivalent is.) At about 80% quality.
I've been trying to find an answer for this as well since I moved to flipz's rom. I don't want the pic resized at all but if it's going to at least keep it reasonable.
Anyone?
Wow. Just tried this out it really does compress it down to ridiculously small sizes. It would be nice if we could just edit the restriction and not have our pictures compressed at all.
Has anyone figured this out? I notice now that I am at 2.1 it compresses images way to much and my images I send end up super small with a ridicules small resolution.
I think handcent sms is less aggressive with pictures.
-------------------------------------
Sent via the XDA Tapatalk App
I use Handcent and while the pictures are resized it is not bad at all. I've looked at the pictures on my girlfriends phone that I send her - and everything looks good - not quite the quality of the original, but good.
I took a picture and the picture looked good until I zoomed in. Despite taking a "superfine" picture on the maximum available resolution, zooming in resulted in an extremely grainy photograph. Pictures taken on my HTC Raphael running Windows Mobile look far better.
I am still happy with the phone and I am sure the picture quality will be fine for what little I use it for, but I really expected a much higher level of detail.
Have you considered the Galaxy S allows for larger zoom?
I moved the pictures from the Raph to my Galaxy S, so I am viewing them on the same platform.
jaredangus said:
I moved the pictures from the Raph to my Galaxy S, so I am viewing them on the same platform.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the picture you took on your ralph is how many megapixels?
Either way a photo when viewed on a monitor will be resized to 1080 max.your just Digital Zooming farther...megapixel doesn't mean quality..it just means your capturing more
3.2 Megapixels on the Raph. I'm going to mess around with settings and see if I can get a better picture, but I was really hoping for this phone to have everything working well out of the box without tweaking.
It's not disappointing because I wasn't expecting much. But the signal to noise ratio of the pics is low. You can see quite a bit of grain. I do like the color saturation.
Meh, it works as a phone cam.
So far with the GPS/Compass issues and the average quality cam, I'm not considering this a "superphone" or a premium Android device. It's just ok. And I'm ok with that.
jaredangus said:
3.2 Megapixels on the Raph. I'm going to mess around with settings and see if I can get a better picture, but I was really hoping for this phone to have everything working well out of the box without tweaking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it is working well....take your pc and resize the images to 1920x1080...
again megapixels does not give you quality..but allows you for farther zoom..if you zoom in more...I have a 6mp canon camera...when I zoom it it looks grainy as well..but when its printed or uploaded..it is rescaled to proper resolution..then it looks perfect...
More megapixels equals less quality on any small device.
Ps I thought that Vibrant didnt have gps issues, no ?
I noticed the same grainy quality and am slightly disappointed as well. But if you make sure you are in the best mode for your environment the quality improves appreciably. Still, the issue is not happy making.
kolyan said:
More megapixels equals less quality on any small device.
Ps I thought that Vibrant didnt have gps issues, no ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I read...the GPS issue is only with Google Maps when there was one, when using a GPS software there was no issue..but firmware upgrade fixed that either way..
@bdjnk - Again..this is to be expected...megapixels != quality...it only allows for more zoom...the quality when compared was no different then a 5mp canon camera...so far the Galaxy S actually has the best camera of any phone of the same class...
gTen said:
From what I read...the GPS issue is only with Google Maps when there was one, when using a GPS software there was no issue..but firmware upgrade fixed that either way..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wrong, the GPS issue is actually more pronounced in other apps, for example, My Tracks.
Firmware upgrade didn't fix anything.
GPS and compass both are ****ty.
jaredangus said:
I took a picture and the picture looked good until I zoomed in. Despite taking a "superfine" picture on the maximum available resolution, zooming in resulted in an extremely grainy photograph. Pictures taken on my HTC Raphael running Windows Mobile look far better.
I am still happy with the phone and I am sure the picture quality will be fine for what little I use it for, but I really expected a much higher level of detail.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apparently the gallery isn't zooming in on photos like it should. Instead of comparing on your phone in the gallery, transfer the photos to a PC and compare on the PC.
You'll notice the GalaxyS pictures come out just fine.
gTen said:
From what I read...the GPS issue is only with Google Maps when there was one, when using a GPS software there was no issue..but firmware upgrade fixed that either way..
@bdjnk - Again..this is to be expected...megapixels != quality...it only allows for more zoom...the quality when compared was no different then a 5mp canon camera...so far the Galaxy S actually has the best camera of any phone of the same class...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Droid X might've nailed it. Dual Leds, panoramic shotting....
I moved over from a Nexus One...and I feel the same way...i love this phone, but the picture quality is not on par with the Nexus. I'm going it's a software issue and can be fixed.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
kolyan said:
Droid X might've nailed it. Dual Leds, panoramic shotting....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They did a side by side of a Galaxy S and DroidX camera...the Galaxy S pretty much destroyed the DroidX..mostly in video recording...
http://thedroidguy.blogspot.com/2010/07/samsung-captivate-vs-motorola-droid-x.html
gTen said:
They did a side by side of a Galaxy S and DroidX camera...the Galaxy S pretty much destroyed the DroidX..mostly in video recording...
http://thedroidguy.blogspot.com/2010/07/samsung-captivate-vs-motorola-droid-x.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i dont really use Video feature on cellphones, but I do use Camera for shots when I dont have my S90 around.
I noticed on then vid that Galaxy was recording in 480p and Droid X in 720p.....whats up with that ?
kolyan said:
i dont really use Video feature on cellphones, but I do use Camera for shots when I dont have my S90 around.
I noticed on then vid that Galaxy was recording in 480p and Droid X in 720p.....whats up with that ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I noticed that too..but for some reason the 480p version came out still better then the Droid 720p...its possible he accidently had it set to 480p or uploaded it as 480p
The G being an actual photo camera...
http://gadgetsdna.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/smartphone-comparisons_original1.jpg
gTen said:
@bdjnk - Again..this is to be expected...megapixels != quality...it only allows for more zoom...the quality when compared was no different then a 5mp canon camera...so far the Galaxy S actually has the best camera of any phone of the same class...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't mention the word megapixel. I was talking about the noticable graininess that exists when viewing pictures, taken with the vibrant, at 100% zoom.
reuthermonkey said:
Apparently the gallery isn't zooming in on photos like it should. Instead of comparing on your phone in the gallery, transfer the photos to a PC and compare on the PC.
You'll notice the GalaxyS pictures come out just fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hm, not really. I am not an expert, but to my eye the same level of noticeable graininess is present on the phone and on my computer.
bdjnk said:
I didn't mention the word megapixel. I was talking about the noticable graininess that exists when viewing pictures, taken with the vibrant, at 100% zoom.
Hm, not really. I am not an expert, but to my eye the same level of noticeable graininess is present on the phone and on my computer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I am saying is this is generally normal on an unprocessed image with high megapixel count..resize both images to 1920x1080 (which is maximum screen resolution now) and you can see what the actual quality is...
Or are you expecting the phone to act like microscope?
to explain, if you do 100% zoom a 1mp would look better then a 3mp, a 3mp will look better then a 5mp..a 5mp would look better then a 20mp..its just how it is..
Hello,
YES!, YES!, I know I'm noob....my first post yeah...OK to the question, when I take pictures using my HD2, and send them to my computer, the pictures don't like as neat and high def as the samples on the phone. I was just wondering if there is way to make it at least a bit more crisp and decent looking than the poor quality and blurness that i get now. The resolution is set to the highest..contrast normal, etc..ANY TIPS...Thank you...
get your hands on BsB Tweaks. Simple .cab install. It has a few options for 'hidden' settings for the camera and camcorder.
I'll do thanks...will that me it sharper??
Honestly I've not done a lot of comparisons, but it does add a SUPERFINE option to the camera, so that has to be worth something!
Finehood, what's the highest resolution setting you see in your camera menu? There should be a 5MP (2592x1552) setting available on there...it's on the second page of resolution options so make sure you didn't miss that.
If you don't see it there, then the BsB option jimbonics mentioned will add that in addition to the "superfine" mode. It also adds a couple of other modes you might like, so it's worth checking out. If you can't or won't use BsB, then they're available as just a regular cab too.
thanks...guys..
thank you guys....and yes I do have it in 5mp, but still the quality looks awful, but I'll be getting the bsb tweak...that sounds like it might fix my problems..any other suggestion is welcome!!!!THANK YOU
finehood said:
thank you guys....and yes I do have it in 5mp, but still the quality looks awful, but I'll be getting the bsb tweak...that sounds like it might fix my problems..any other suggestion is welcome!!!!THANK YOU
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check out these other tips too:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=7229727&postcount=2
(the last one on that list is what we've already suggested above)
thanks again...
good tips...I'll keep you guys post it if it gets better!!
Are you having a lot of noise problems ? Unfortunately that's not going to go away. If you're expecting some quality pictures like what a real camera would take you'll be quite disappointed . I've tried tweaking it myself left and right and every which way possible. I've seen some sample pictures from the EVO and even with it's 8MP cam it does not look a whole lot better.
good to know..
actually, u know what..i kind of knew that it would never be close to a regular picture cam, but with the high megapixels at least i was expecting something decent...but thank you...I did the bsb tweaks and got a bit better...the hidden tricks are all right...thanks everyone..
the fact is HD2 cam is poorer than HD's. I have both devices, HD in default (auto) settings takes very well pix, and HD2 (even after tweaks) takes puctures "ugly". The overall temperature of the shot is in grey tones domination, while HD take very realistic, closer to simple digicams. If anybody has an answers, please comment. Would be great if we will be able to take pix even just HD does.
When you take a picture and look at it from your computer is the size of the picture the same as the HD2's screen?
I'll usually just right click on the picture and send it to paint, click on image, then stretch/skew function. I'll reduce it to at least 50% / 50% and work my way down from there. That usually increases the image quality for me. I don't need a picture the size of three of my computer screens. Hope it helps.
When in doubt my friend photoshop is your friend
right...
photoshop will do the fixing for us....jiji...but like i said before i was just wondering if there was a way to make it better...like a tweak or a .cab, etc. bsb is not bad, but it doen't make the image any better in quality...but good tweak really good tweaks..
finehood said:
photoshop will do the fixing for us....jiji...but like i said before i was just wondering if there was a way to make it better...like a tweak or a .cab, etc. bsb is not bad, but it doen't make the image any better in quality...but good tweak really good tweaks..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What we have here folks is a hardware problem not a software problem. Well actually a little bit of both . All the software tweaks out there does help a bit compared to the stock camera but that's as far as your going to get. Software can only do so much and there isn't a magical software solution when you are coupled with a lousy quality camera lens. The fact is HTC has probably cheapened out the quality of the camera lens compared to earlier phones but regardless the HD2 is a phone first not a camera. Short of replacing the whole lens there's very little software can do when the hardware isn't up to par.
I've had my HD2 since June 30th and believe me this thing takes MUCH BETTER pics than my Blackberry Bold 9700 did at 3.2MP and that phone took some really nice pictures.
I think it depends on the environment your in at the time. I took a few close up pics of my Wife and kids and those images came out beautiful. I also took some scenery shots in landscape and those images came out awsome as well. I took some pics inside the Tennessee Aquarium and had mixed results. As long as the lighting was good the images came out great. In darker settings the images were not as sharp.
I do use BsB Tweeks and I also have my resolution set to 5MP. I'm not sure why your camera is producing such awful images but I'm very pleased with mine.
squire366 said:
I do use BsB Tweeks and I also have my resolution set to 5MP. I'm not sure why your camera is producing such awful images but I'm very pleased with mine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it awful? He never posted any samples of his pictures. Are you really pleased because I'm not. How good the pictures actually look to an individual are highly subjective. I would hardly consider the pictures I've taken pleasing but I'm just going to have to settle.
I think the problem here is that finehood is really picky and had high expectations. I'm assuming what he had in mind were quality pictures closer to that of a real camera.
Sounds like user error to me. Try wiping your lens before taking pics. . My HD2 takes great pics.
Pop...
Take a picture at max resolution. Then copy that picture over to your pc. View that picture at 100%. You'll see it looks like ass.
hey guys...
i was reading some of the posts, and it makes sense, believe me I never got the wild idea of a phone cam being equal or better quality than a normal cam... but even with the 5 mp and the tweaks and considering light issues or environment surrounding your pics is not even close to a decent quality that's all I'm saying, the pictures look BEAUTIFUL on your phone, really neat and crisp, once you transfer your pics to a computer and see it in full scale you'll know what I'm talking about...blurriness, blur edges, sometimes pixelete images mainly in the face, I'm happy with the phone....and all it does, but I WAS JUST WONDERING if there was a way to make it a bit better...BSB Tweaks did some adjustments...thanks for the feedback guys, I'll be posting some pics shortly..so you guys get the idea....
Some articles stated that with Android L, devices will receive the capability to save photos in RAW .dng format, providing a far superior photo quality for shutter bugs. I have looked through the stock sammy camera app, but no RAW, and I was unable to find another app on play store to do this. Is there any camera app you guys can suggest that has that format? Please help, I don't mind if I have to pay for the app just give me a link or something, please
posedatull said:
Some articles stated that with Android L, devices will receive the capability to save photos in RAW .dng format, providing a far superior photo quality for shutter bugs. I have looked through the stock sammy camera app, but no RAW, and I was unable to find another app on play store to do this. Is there any camera app you guys can suggest that has that format? Please help, I don't mind if I have to pay for the app just give me a link or something, please
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This might help.
It's a third party app from playstore Photo Mate
amk19 said:
This might help.
It's a third party app from playstore Photo Mate
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks man, but that app just lets me modify RAW pictures made by other cameras and then copied to the phone. I was looking for what the L Camera is supposed to do for the Nexus 5 and6 devices. Actually take pictures in RAW format with my N9005
posedatull said:
Thanks man, but that app just lets me modify RAW pictures made by other cameras and then copied to the phone. I was looking for what the L Camera is supposed to do for the Nexus 5 and6 devices. Actually take pictures in RAW format with my N9005
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try this Camera FV-5
amk19 said:
Try this Camera FV-5
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bought it, tried, said our device doesn't support raw. Asked for refund
posedatull said:
Bought it, tried, said our device doesn't support raw. Asked for refund
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh. Okay. Sorry buddy.
RAW format isn't going to do much about the quality of the photographs on a mobile phone with a sensor this small.
The sensors in smartphones cameras are the lowest possible tier. Using a digital negative isn't going to improve that.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 2
ShadowLea said:
RAW format isn't going to do much about the quality of the photographs on a mobile phone with a sensor this small.
The sensors in smartphones cameras are the lowest possible tier. Using a digital negative isn't going to improve that.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is simply not true. The ability to capture RAW images has immensely improved camera performance on other devices.
troy2062 said:
That is simply not true. The ability to capture RAW images has immensely improved camera performance on other devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I sincerely hope you're joking.
Do you actually know, without looking it up first, what the RAW format is for?
It is a digital negative. It contains all the data the sensor is able to capture.
The resulting JPG's quality is entirely determined by the compression format used by the camera app.
Shooting in RAW allows you more freedom to tweak the image before turning it into a JPG. It does NOT improve the camera performance. It does not increase the sharpness, decrease the noise and reduce blurring.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 2
troy2062 said:
That is simply not true. The ability to capture RAW images has immensely improved camera performance on other devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry but this is just wrong.
Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk
ShadowLea said:
I sincerely hope you're joking.
Do you actually know, without looking it up first, what the RAW format is for?
It is a digital negative. It contains all the data the sensor is able to capture.
The resulting JPG's quality is entirely determined by the compression format used by the camera app.
Shooting in RAW allows you more freedom to tweak the image before turning it into a JPG. It does NOT improve the camera performance. It does not increase the sharpness, decrease the noise and reduce blurring.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am a photography enthusiast and I do not appreciate your condescending tone. The XDA community at large has become far too hostile for my liking in recent years.
For all practical purposes, it does improve camera performance. When capturing in RAW using the camera2 API, you gain full manual control over shutter speed and ISO, as well as the ability to bypass the camera module's automated image processing. The resulting DNG is completely free of automated correction and you will have significantly more dynamic range to work with.
Despite the small sensor size of smartphone cameras, shooting RAW still yields significant benefits.
troy2062 said:
The XDA community at large has become far too hostile for my liking in recent years.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wish I could agree with you on this more. XDA is floating with kids nowadays, some of them haven't even hit puberty yet
troy2062 said:
I am a photography enthusiast and I do not appreciate your condescending tone. The XDA community at large has become far too hostile for my liking in recent years.
For all practical purposes, it does improve camera performance. When capturing in RAW using the camera2 API, you gain full manual control over shutter speed and ISO, as well as the ability to bypass the camera module's automated image processing. The resulting DNG is completely free of automated correction and you will have significantly more dynamic range to work with.
Despite the small sensor size of smartphone cameras, shooting RAW still yields significant benefits.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm glad you're not another one of those people who just heard a word used on a site and thinks they know everything. There are too many of those around, and they are the reason so many of the senior members are hostile towards others.
Particularly where the topic concerns photography. Too many bloody Instagrammers who think they're professionals. The most hilarious ones are the ones who don't even own a DSLR, but think their phone's camera can do the same thing. Or those idiots who complain about the camera quality, and leave the settings on auto.
Most apps have ISO control, even the stock camera.
Isn't that what I just said? "The resulting DNG is completely free of automated correction and you will have significantly more dynamic range to work with." is the exact same thing as "Shooting in RAW allows you more freedom to tweak the image before turning it into a JPG."
RAW mode only improves the resulting JPG. It can't improve the basic image. The lightbleed, stained glass details and oilpainting effect is a result of the sensorsize, not the JPG compression. The compression amplifies the problem, but it doesn't cause it.
And if an image is valuable enough to spend good time on taking the perfect shot, then taking it with a phone is a waste. If you're going to use BULB mode, you'll need a stationary. If you're going to drag the stationary along, might as well bring your DSLR and do it properly.
Was that condescending? I don't know, social cues aren't my area of expertise. But if you thought it was, you should've seen our Photo-Storytelling professor back at uni. That man made everyone afraid to even speak if there was a chance that your answer wasn't 100% accurate. Best class ever.
devilsdouble said:
Wish I could agree with you on this more. XDA is floating with kids nowadays, some of them haven't even hit puberty yet
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've seen 9 year olds act like they know everything and tell the professional developers how they should do their job.
I've seen a 15 year old attempt to tell Chainfire how Root works. *snicker*. Too bad that thread was deleted, it was pure comedy gold. :laugh:
The major problem is that many of the offended users treat XDA as a helpdesk. It's not. It's a developers website. People have a responsibility to Google before they come here to ask their questions. If they neglect that responsiblity, the community doesn't take it very well. It's like going onto a website for car modders and asking how to put gas in a car at a station.
I don't think Samsung did rewrite the Camera HAL and therefore no complete camera2 api support which is a very bad thing.
We don't get a lot of the goodies especially the performance improvement.
Currently there's a 1 second shutter lag on 3rd party apps comparing to stock Samsung camera.
ShadowLea said:
RAW format isn't going to do much about the quality of the photographs on a mobile phone with a sensor this small.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
RAW format will allow you to develop better quality images than out-of-camera JPEGs.
In-phone postprocessing is limited by its no-so-great software and also processing power (it needs to be able to process a lot of pictures quickly). If you just take RAW files from the phone and run it through dedicated software (Lightroom, Aftershot Pro, Noise Ninja), I bet you'd get better images than what you OOC even without fine-tuning anything.
But the more importantly, it allows you to fine-tune a lot of stuff - fix white balance, exposition, find suitable contrast - besides creative control you will often get significantly better quality images.
ShadowLea said:
The sensors in smartphones cameras are the lowest possible tier. Using a digital negative isn't going to improve that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used to take pictures with way worse cameras (like Canon A410) than camera on Note 3 and RAW often made a big difference. RAW is actually more useful on poor sensors (and/or poor post processors) where you need to squeeze the maximum from the picture. On the otherhand, e.g. my Fuji X100 has good enough (APS-C) sensor and very good JPEG engine that I very rarely feel the need to shoot RAW.
Personally I always shot in RAW on a dlsr as I always tweak my photos, the freedom to change tweak exposure/white balance has become a necessity. I can't stand processed jpegs anymore, especially when I don't know what the processing is really doing but I know it ain't doing a good job.
I got the Note 3 a few weeks back and have been wondering about RAW capability as it's something that it's important to me and others who want the extended freedom with their pictures. I have not yet jumped into Lollipop to test it out, but is the Camera2 API included in the lollipop roms available now? Is that API a lollipop standard? If so there's no reason our device shouldn't be able to shoot in RAW.
eddiee said:
RAW format will allow you to develop better quality images than out-of-camera JPEGs.
In-phone postprocessing is limited by its no-so-great software and also processing power (it needs to be able to process a lot of pictures quickly). If you just take RAW files from the phone and run it through dedicated software (Lightroom, Aftershot Pro, Noise Ninja), I bet you'd get better images than what you OOC even without fine-tuning anything.
But the more importantly, it allows you to fine-tune a lot of stuff - fix white balance, exposition, find suitable contrast - besides creative control you will often get significantly better quality images.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know how RAW works. I'm a professional photographer, I never use anything other than RAW. Which has some downsides.. I'm seriously running out of storage space on my harddrives
You're forgetting one very important factor. Given the size of RAW files, you can take about 40 pictures before you run out of space on your device, less if you have a decent amount of apps. L fixes the tight security that prevented apps to write to the SD in 4.4, but even then the space limitations are.. obnoxious. 13MP should translate to about 20-25MB per picture. Sure there are 128GB MicroSD cards, but unless you keep that clear of any other data (I have the entire LOTR Extended trilogy on there, for example.) it's still going to be a limitation. The 128GB cards are also quite pricey. I use 128GB SDcards in my camera, and on an average day I have to switch around at least once because it's full. And that's empty cards. Phone cards have data on them.
I used to take pictures with way worse cameras (like Canon A410) than camera on Note 3 and RAW often made a big difference. RAW is actually more useful on poor sensors (and/or poor post processors) where you need to squeeze the maximum from the picture. On the otherhand, e.g. my Fuji X100 has good enough (APS-C) sensor and very good JPEG engine that I very rarely feel the need to shoot RAW.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Evidently, as the A410 had dedicated camera hardware, as opposed to it just being an addition designed for random facebook pictures. And the JPEG conversion in 2005 was severely underdeveloped compared to modern day, and the hardware allows significantly more calculations. Even then the sensors in a modern-day cheap Compact camera are better than the ones in a smartphone, simply because those in smartphones are cut from the leftovers of the sensor plate.
Ah, a Fuji X100? It's one of the classic-style shell camera's, if I recall correctly. I played around with one a while ago, one of my colleagues is a hipster, so yea, he has one. :silly:
Funny little thing, pretty decent quality for something so small. It's not a system camera, though, so his arguments to convince me to get one were completely wasted. I'm a macro, landscape and architecture photographer; I need my different lenses.
My Canon EOS 70D can shoot in JPEG at ISO 6400 without noise. Doesn't mean I ever take it off the RAW+JPG setting. Even then I always edit my pictures in CameraRaw. JPG is good enough for preview, but I require PNG and TIFF for high-quality print. And shooting Macro and Landscape in JPG is simply a wasted effort. Those always require editing. So does architecture, because I'm too lazy to drag a technical camera along, so I have to do a lot of perspective correction. RAW is better suited for that.
There is one thing on which I do see the point of shooting in RAW with a smartphone. The lens is so utterly rubbish that the chromatic aberration is simply painful. Not to mention the overly obvious light flares if you try to shoot anything near a lightsource or white. It won't solve it, but at least you can tone it down a bit.
Still, I'd rather use my DSLR for those photographs. It also looks an awful lot less ridiculous than standing around with a smartphone taking pictures.
ShadowLea said:
You're forgetting one very important factor. Given the size of RAW files, you can take about 40 pictures before you run out of space on your device, less if you have a decent amount of apps. L fixes the tight security that prevented apps to write to the SD in 4.4, but even then the space limitations are.. obnoxious. 13MP should translate to about 20-25MB per picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
20-25 MB per RAW picture means 40-50 pictures per GB. Currently I have 9 GBs free on the phone and 21 GB on the card. That translates to about 1200-1500 pictures. That sounds quite OK.
Still, I don't plan to shoot exclusively RAW - there's no point in fiddling with RAW for simple point&shoot pictures. Personally I'd use RAW only when it's necessary - in challenging lighting conditions, important shots etc.
Storage won't be a problem for me.
ShadowLea said:
Evidently, as the A410 had dedicated camera hardware, as opposed to it just being an addition designed for random facebook pictures. And the JPEG conversion in 2005 was severely underdeveloped compared to modern day, and the hardware allows significantly more calculations. Even then the sensors in a modern-day cheap Compact camera are better than the ones in a smartphone, simply because those in smartphones are cut from the leftovers of the sensor plate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
JPEG conversion is bad in a lot of cameras even today (although Samsung's JPEG engine seems to be one of the better ones, in smartphones). The point was that RAW is useful both for good and bad cameras (sensors).
ShadowLea said:
Still, I'd rather use my DSLR for those photographs. It also looks an awful lot less ridiculous than standing around with a smartphone taking pictures.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Best camera is the one you have with you. DSLR is too big for me to drag around. That's why I bought Fuji - it's quite small and light while having very good IQ. Actually even the Fuji is too big and heavy (especially for the neck) on the longer hikes (30km) - sometimes I just leave it at home and go just with the phone. I eagerly await phone camera improvements (including RAW support) so I can leave my larger cameras at home.
eddiee said:
20-25 MB per RAW picture means 40-50 pictures per GB. Currently I have 9 GBs free on the phone and 21 GB on the card. That translates to about 1200-1500 pictures. That sounds quite OK.
Still, I don't plan to shoot exclusively RAW - there's no point in fiddling with RAW for simple point&shoot pictures. Personally I'd use RAW only when it's necessary - in challenging lighting conditions, important shots etc.
Storage won't be a problem for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You've got a lot more free space than me. I've got 1GB on the phone left, and 2GB on my MicroSD (Out of 128, yea... The disadvantage of 1080p series. >.<)
Oh I've seen people do it; shoot in RAW then put it on Instagram. :laugh:
JPEG conversion is bad in a lot of cameras even today (although Samsung's JPEG engine seems to be one of the better ones, in smartphones). The point was that RAW is useful both for good and bad cameras (sensors).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well yes. But it still can't fix the problems caused by the bad sensor. It can decrease them because JPG conversion aplifies them, but it can't fix them. RAW can't fix hardware faults. (Oh if only it could..)
Best camera is the one you have with you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I both agree and disagree. Any camera is better than no camera, true.
But I had an EOS 500D before this, and it simply made bad pictures. For memories and snapshots the quality matters little (And it may even add to the photo), but it had a similar problem as the smartphones: it was a low-tier model and had a cheap sensor. All the editing in RAW couldn't fix the data that simply wasn't collected, and it can't add detail that isn't there. The same issue applies to smartphones.
(And before anyone tries to, don't even think of throwing out "The quality of the photograph is determined by the photographer". I hate that saying, and it's only ever said by those who can't afford a decent camera. That saying applies to the quality of the content, not the image quality. Someone usually ends up using that argument in any photography discussion, so consider this a pre-emptive strike.)
DSLR is too big for me to drag around. That's why I bought Fuji - it's quite small and light while having very good IQ. Actually even the Fuji is too big and heavy (especially for the neck) on the longer hikes (30km) - sometimes I just leave it at home and go just with the phone. I eagerly await phone camera improvements (including RAW support) so I can leave my larger cameras at home.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It can get a bit heavy, yes. It's why I always use a backpack. True, it's still about 30-40 kilos, but as a backpack that's easily manageable. I've tried taking photo's with my phone on my trips, but I always end up wanting my macro, telezoom or wideangle lens. But I'm the weird one who stands around taking photographs of a floral arrangement while everyone else is photographing the Colosseum, and who takes a macro photograph of the leg of the Eiffel Tower, but not the tower itself. So perhaps I'm a bad example of the average photographer. :laugh: :silly:
But I had an EOS 500D before this, and it simply made bad pictures. For memories and snapshots the quality matters little (And it may even add to the photo), but it had a similar problem as the smartphones: it was a low-tier model and had a cheap sensor. All the editing in RAW couldn't fix the data that simply wasn't collected, and it can't add detail that isn't there. The same issue applies to smartphones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When shooting raw, images should be taken with post processing in mind and exposures set to take the most amount of the important data whatever it may be. Thus a picture looking good or bad in camera is totally irrelevant. The 500D takes good pictures, it's no 5D mk3 but good enough for semi-pro depending on what kind of stuff is being shot with it. A good lens on a lowish tier camera goes a long way, much more so than a good sensor with a mediocre lens.