Related
i imagine the bitrate would be similar
any way to do this?
Someone could hack it wouldn't mind!
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
i really don't think it's possible .
its hardware issue, the sensor won't be a
ble to take it even with lower than 720p
wouldn't have to be 60fps even though.
anything higher would be an improvement
tommo123 said:
wouldn't have to be 60fps even though.
anything higher would be an improvement
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Video recording needs to be done in a standardized frame rate, 24, 25, or 30Hz (or 50 & 60p). If not, it would be a terrible jitter from pulldown during playback.
plenty of videos are vfr depending on the scene motion state though (although mosty wmv afaik). as long as the player knows the right frame rate to play back it plays back fine
anyway, i was thinking as far as the data rate goes, it wouldn't be much different. if there's some hardware limit that doesn't allow it - fair enough.
what is the highest fps we could get though?
been searching high and low, is there a working mod (like Camera HX for S3) for the i9505?
I have tried editing the settings file, but is seems to ignore that.....
video of the features you can look at
?? i don't understand?
you want a video or have a video?
I definitely like to be able to change the bitrate and framerate. I actually need lower bitrate a lot of time. I mean there's no point using sky high bitrate if the limiting factor is actually the camera and lens. I was recording at 720p the other day and the s4 produced a 400mb file for 4 min of video. That is ridiculous...4 min of 720p should not take anywhere close to 400 mb....
Lol completely the opposite of what I want...to each his own I guess
Why is this not available on the newest version of nexus line?
If you pick a other app, is then possible to record 1080p 60fps?
Send with the App Tapatalk
????
Send with the App Tapatalk
Hmmmm cant see anywhere the answer
Send with the App Tapatalk
Technically speaking the Snapdragon is capable of processing 1080 @ 120 FPS, however there may be either a hardware limit on the sub-processor of camera (haven't even looked if there was one). As far as I can see from the kernel source posted on AOSP there is a high media profile for [email protected] fps and [email protected], Theoretically you might be able to just create another entry in the profile to enable it.
Bump..
Send with the App Tapatalk
I'm very very interested to this discussion! The last nexus 6 was 100% capable of recording fullhd videos @60fps but Google disable that function and nobody know why, I was absolutely sure that in this nexus 6p that record mode would be present! There are no reason why it should be disabled, who cares if I can record a bird at 240fps (in slow motion), how many times somebody use this functions? One in a month?
How many instead make some (normal) videos? Maybe two/three times a week or even more and recording @ 60fps instead of 30fps is like day and night! Damn Google.
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because 60fps looks a lot better - obviously.
I don't know how you, or anybody can even come close to thinking the 30 frames per second is OK when you have the option of 120 and 240.
Have you never seen a YT video with 60fps!? Yeah... You're blind if you can't see the difference. It makes no sense for Google to have those very high frame rate options but still not have 60 frames per second at 1080p.
Also, no, you are wrong about people slowing down 60 frames per second video. You would slow down 120 or 240, yes, but nobody in their right mind would use 60 frames per second down to 30 in today's world. You would just use the 60 frames per second video because it looks a lot smoother.
You sound very ignorant in your post. Nearly all of what you said is bull****.
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know about your source, but the human eyes are seeing the world at arround 2000fps.
PS: you can clearly see the difference between 30vs60 and you can see a little difference at 120fps
I think that poster is either a troll or a moron - or has been reading console forums (because anyone with half a brain knows that what they said is a complete lie)
Me thinks they didn't read before spewing garbage. Shame really...
marcoruzza said:
I'm very very interested to this discussion! The last nexus 6 was 100% capable of recording fullhd videos @60fps but Google disable that function and nobody know why, I was absolutely sure that in this nexus 6p that record mode would be present! There are no reason why it should be disabled, who cares if I can record a bird at 240fps (in slow motion), how many times somebody use this functions? One in a month?
How many instead make some (normal) videos? Maybe two/three times a week or even more and recording @ 60fps instead of 30fps is like day and night! Damn Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iRub1Out said:
Because 60fps looks a lot better - obviously.
I don't know how you, or anybody can even come close to thinking the 30 frames per second is OK when you have the option of 120 and 240.
Have you never seen a YT video with 60fps!? Yeah... You're blind if you can't see the difference. It makes no sense for Google to have those very high frame rate options but still not have 60 frames per second at 1080p.
Also, no, you are wrong about people slowing down 60 frames per second video. You would slow down 120 or 240, yes, but nobody in their right mind would use 60 frames per second down to 30 in today's world. You would just use the 60 frames per second video because it looks a lot smoother.
You sound very ignorant in your post. Nearly all of what you said is bull****.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
warplane95 said:
I don't know about your source, but the human eyes are seeing the world at arround 2000fps.
PS: you can clearly see the difference between 30vs60 and you can see a little difference at 120fps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iRub1Out said:
I think that poster is either a troll or a moron - or has been reading console forums (because anyone with half a brain knows that what they said is a complete lie)
Me thinks they didn't read before spewing garbage. Shame really...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can definitely say that I can see it. Between 30fps and 60fps. Soooo much smoother and crisp. If you look a sample on youtube. You only want 60 fps.
Send with the App Tapatalk
The human eye does not "view" at around 2000fps, it doesn't actually see in any fps while viewing the natural world. The human eye sees things live, as in ~fps. Those of us with good eyesight can definitely see the screen refresh on lower rates like 60fps. My TV is 1080p hd @ 50hz (which is not fps) & its gotten so painful to watch it, that I am considering a new TV. When you watch a 60fps video on a 50hz TV, the refresh rate & the frames of the video don't coincide & make the experience jumpy. 30fps looks better because the fps is slower than the refresh rate.
On our 2k phone screens however 30fps looks jumpy because the resolution is higher & our eyes are trying to view it in the same manner as we view the natural world.
iRub1Out said:
I think that poster is either a troll or a moron - or has been reading console forums (because anyone with half a brain knows that what they said is a complete lie)
Me thinks they didn't read before spewing garbage. Shame really...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually studied photography and film extensively in college as it was my major. It is true that 30fps is standard and 60fps would look awkward. There are some human eyes that notice changes up to 200fps but those are basically jet pilots, the exception not the rule. No human eye would be able to notice 2,000 fps. That is not possible. Lastly, set your camera to 240 fps and see how everything gets darker. That isn't a lie. It is a fact that high frame rates will result in darker, noiser videos because they require more light.
60 fps is not a good speed to shoot at. Especially in a sensor without IS. You will get more jitter in your video. I produce video for a living, as In it is my job and I do it daily. You dont EVER record in 60 fps unless you are capturing very fast action or are intending to slow it down. And when you record in 60 FPS, you always export it at 30 fps or 25 fps from Premier pro of Final cut, whatever you use.
All I know is that on my Note 4, I only record at 60fps 1080p and wow does it ever look better then anything I've ever recorded in 30fps.
Delete.
Photography and videography are not the same.
60fps is better than 30fps for any and all reason regardless of whatever you think you know - nobody agrees with you if they've seen 60fps video. It's day and night, and if you read anything from YT users, gamers, normal humans, they all say 60fps is better - in any scenario.
Back on point, however, still mind blown that this wasn't included with the camera.
I use Premier Pro and After Effects, and 60fps is my only export option - I wouldn't even consider lower unless it was SHOT lower, but never is. Look at my YT page. Nothing under 60fps once I had my hands on a camera capable of 60fps. I practice what I preach.
I would NEVER shoot 60 fps video with an intention to slow it down, that's stupid - that's what 120/240fps are for - those are to be slowed down.
60 fps is for normal viewing speed - anything higher is OK to slow down, but 60 down to 30 - no thanks. That's just a waste of good 60fps footage.
Any one tried snap camera on N6P yet? http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2055140
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic or not , but I can tell you 100% that a human eye can see beyond whatever you have stated. I game on a 144hz monitor , and yes I could tell and feel the difference between 30/60/144.
Back on topic , I found it very weird already when the Galaxy s6/note 5 with the fast processor not being able to record in 240fps . Also , I've noticed slow motion inconsistencies regarding the 6p's 240fps , some youtube videos look buttery smooth , some looks like some slideshow. No idea what's causing this , any thoughts?
nonnasmyladie said:
I actually studied photography and film extensively in college as it was my major. It is true that 30fps is standard and 60fps would look awkward. There are some human eyes that notice changes up to 200fps but those are basically jet pilots, the exception not the rule. No human eye would be able to notice 2,000 fps. That is not possible. Lastly, set your camera to 240 fps and see how everything gets darker. That isn't a lie. It is a fact that high frame rates will result in darker, noiser videos because they require more light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't assume what others would find awkward. Guessing a lot like it since Google allows those to see it on Youtube. Even besides that, you say you can't see it or its "awkward". Okay. Me and plenty of others like it and can see the difference. Videos are not dark looking when I record ALL my videos with my iPhone.
Sad to see Google didn't include this with this latest Nexus device.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk
Hi.iwanna ask about h.265 codec setting in our axon 7. Im using a2017g on b08 firmware. Is it normal when i set video to h.265 codec and 60fps the video become slightly zoomed compared to h.264 codec? Thanks
You mean the 1080p at 60fps mode using h.265? I have noticed that also.
That's probably a sensor crop. Sometimes you see that on devices when developers want to include a format that pushes the limits of what the hardware can handle. The device will sample less than the full dimensions of what the sensor can capture so that it is processing a more manageable amount of data. It then upscales each frame to the target resolution.
Personally, I think the 1080p 60fps mode on the Axon 7 looks like garbage. It's not just cropping the sensor, it's sporadically blurry because I think it's also interpolating a certain number of frames to reach 60fps. The bitrate looks inadequate and the colors are washed out. Most SD 820 phones don't even attempt a 1080p 60fps mode. While it's a type of real time hardware encoding that the chipset technically supports, I believe the results are not desirable. It probably drops a lot of frames unless developers implement tricks to improve the raw performance as Axon has attempted.
The 4K video mode at 30fps that uses h.265 looks pretty good to me though as long as there is an adequate amount of light. There's no sensor crop, the colors look better, there's substantially less blurring, and the level of compression artifacting visible is much lower.
argblah said:
You mean the 1080p at 60fps mode using h.265? I have noticed that also.
That's probably a sensor crop. Sometimes you see that on devices when developers want to include a format that pushes the limits of what the hardware can handle. The device will sample less than the full dimensions of what the sensor can capture so that it is processing a more manageable amount of data. It then upscales each frame to the target resolution.
Personally, I think the 1080p 60fps mode on the Axon 7 looks like garbage. It's not just cropping the sensor, it's sporadically blurry because I think it's also interpolating a certain number of frames to reach 60fps. The bitrate looks inadequate and the colors are washed out. Most SD 820 phones don't even attempt a 1080p 60fps mode. While it's a type of real time hardware encoding that the chipset technically supports, I believe the results are not desirable. It probably drops a lot of frames unless developers implement tricks to improve the raw performance as Axon has attempted.
The 4K video mode at 30fps that uses h.265 looks pretty good to me though as long as there is an adequate amount of light. There's no sensor crop, the colors look better, there's substantially less blurring, and the level of compression artifacting visible is much lower.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.thats answer my question.thank you:laugh:
argblah said:
You mean the 1080p at 60fps mode using h.265? I have noticed that also.
That's probably a sensor crop. Sometimes you see that on devices when developers want to include a format that pushes the limits of what the hardware can handle. The device will sample less than the full dimensions of what the sensor can capture so that it is processing a more manageable amount of data. It then upscales each frame to the target resolution.
Personally, I think the 1080p 60fps mode on the Axon 7 looks like garbage. It's not just cropping the sensor, it's sporadically blurry because I think it's also interpolating a certain number of frames to reach 60fps. The bitrate looks inadequate and the colors are washed out. Most SD 820 phones don't even attempt a 1080p 60fps mode. While it's a type of real time hardware encoding that the chipset technically supports, I believe the results are not desirable. It probably drops a lot of frames unless developers implement tricks to improve the raw performance as Axon has attempted.
The 4K video mode at 30fps that uses h.265 looks pretty good to me though as long as there is an adequate amount of light. There's no sensor crop, the colors look better, there's substantially less blurring, and the level of compression artifacting visible is much lower.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
naset said:
Yes.thats answer my question.thank you:laugh:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What about 1080p60 on the Lineage camera? I believe it looks much better than stock 1080p60.
Maybe snap is even better (caf sources?)
Also, I have no idea about this sorta stuff, but what would the bottleneck be? There's a dedicated image processing thingy on-die, right?
Choose an username... said:
What about 1080p60 on the Lineage camera? I believe it looks much better than stock 1080p60.
Maybe snap is even better (caf sources?)
Also, I have no idea about this sorta stuff, but what would the bottleneck be? There's a dedicated image processing thingy on-die, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Never try los yet so i dont know the quality
@argblah,
Hi, have you tried this issue on other phone? Have you fixed your phone's problem?
This has been bugging the hell out of me since I got this phone. All the reviews made such a huge deal out of the phones camera quality and capabilities. But upon using it myself.. I am not all that impressed. When I record a video in say 1280x720, the resulting video always looks like it was recorded in say 800x450 or something along those lines. No matter what bitrate I choose, it looks like a lower resolution. You can't zoom the video hardly without it degrading. Go ahead, try zooming on some text in 720P. Now compare it to 720P on some other phone. Now, when I record in say 1920x1080, the resulting video looks like it was recorded in 720p, not 1080.
I have 720p videos I recorded from my Galaxy S4 that look FAR FAR better than so called 720p on the V20. It seems like the camera on the V20 is UPSCALING the video recording output to the next highest resolution than what is ACTUALLY being recorded. 720p appears as 480p, 1080p appears as 720p etc. As someone who is picky about quality, this has been a major blow since I got this phone. I am surprised no one has ever posted about this.
THE-COPS said:
This has been bugging the hell out of me since I got this phone. All the reviews made such a huge deal out of the phones camera quality and capabilities. But upon using it myself.. I am not all that impressed. When I record a video in say 1280x720, the resulting video always looks like it was recorded in say 800x450 or something along those lines. No matter what bitrate I choose, it looks like a lower resolution. You can't zoom the video hardly without it degrading. Go ahead, try zooming on some text in 720P. Now compare it to 720P on some other phone. Now, when I record in say 1920x1080, the resulting video looks like it was recorded in 720p, not 1080.
I have 720p videos I recorded from my Galaxy S4 that look FAR FAR better than so called 720p on the V20. It seems like the camera on the V20 is UPSCALING the video recording output to the next highest resolution than what is ACTUALLY being recorded. 720p appears as 480p, 1080p appears as 720p etc. As someone who is picky about quality, this has been a major blow since I got this phone. I am surprised no one has ever posted about this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Iv noticed it, but I brushed it off as I felt nothing could be done to fix by me or other devs that I am/was aware of. Now that I think if it more from your words, maybe could be fixed by overclocking the 4k to 6k, or 8k, to get a 4k resolution. Need root to try this though.
Well, at least I'm not the only one who noticed. Is it the same way on Oreo? I mean, did the update "fix" anything related to video recording resolution or is it still upscaled? (I'm still on 7.0 Nougat for battery reasons, but if 8.0 has a video improvement.. well, game changer). This seems like false advertising meant to try and push 4k capability when it really couldn't. If the camera really isn't capturing 4K, then does that mean it would be too much a burden on the hardware to actually be pulling 30 4k FPS ...VS 30 1080P FPS upscaled to 4K?
Are you talking about the quality on Google photos, or the out of camera quality?
have you tried exporting it to your computer via USB? Cos, for some reason the quality and resolution are lower on G Photos.
THE-COPS said:
Well, at least I'm not the only one who noticed. Is it the same way on Oreo? I mean, did the update "fix" anything related to video recording resolution or is it still upscaled? (I'm still on 7.0 Nougat for battery reasons, but if 8.0 has a video improvement.. well, game changer). This seems like false advertising meant to try and push 4k capability when it really couldn't. If the camera really isn't capturing 4K, then does that mean it would be too much a burden on the hardware to actually be pulling 30 4k FPS ...VS 30 1080P FPS upscaled to 4K?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think a burden but more of how's it's coded. 4K on tripod is hard to tell vs 1080p. Note 3 was same way. Oreo cam may be better but I can't really tell. Idk why 16mp is not fully utilized for 4K 16:9 either. Coding that I personally don't know how to do. Slow mo don't even have sound via stock cam.
Lebatman said:
Are you talking about the quality on Google photos, or the out of camera quality?
have you tried exporting it to your computer via USB? Cos, for some reason the quality and resolution are lower on G Photos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Camera output. That is, the resulting video file from the camera after pressing record button.
I know there is a loss of quality from compression. But it's not compression artifacts causing this. Bitrate doesn't make any difference. You can clearly see the video detail is not even close to what it says it is. I especially noticed this with text. I was recording a video while in a car. There was a car maybe 1-2 car lengths ahead. One can easily read the license plate. In the recorded 1280x720 video, I could NOT make out the plate at all. You'd thought I recorded in 960x540 or close. It's rather blurry. I think that's why LG added all that oversharpening.
I even set it to take photos at 1280x720. And even with high jpg compression zoomed/cropped, it doesn't look like the 1280x720 zoomed/cropped video of the same exact item being photo'd.
Been using Mark Harmons OpenCamera and trying all sorts of video bitrates. Then changing photo save resolution. I found that a photo resolution of between 960x540 and 800x480 (cropped) looks very similar to what a cropped 720P video appears. It seems as if there is some kind of preprocessing going on with the image that makes it appear extremely muddy (smudged blurry detail cropped). Nothing at all changed with the quality whether the bitrate was set at 5Mbps or 50Mbps. Quality remained unchanged.
Mysticblaze347. I don't think a burden but more of how's it's coded. 4K on tripod is hard to tell vs 1080p. Note 3 was same way. Oreo cam may be better but I can't really tell. Idk why 16mp is not fully utilized for 4K 16:9 either. Coding that I personally don't know how to do. Slow mo don't even have sound via stock cam.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like Oreo update isn't worth the trouble. As far as how it's coded... I think it's the awful preprocessing muddying up the image detail as I mentioned above. Using massively high bitrates does no good at all.
4K on tripod VS 1080 on tripod is quite noticeable on the V20 due to the appearance of upscaling (or horrible preprocessing.. whichever it is).
I didn't know Slo-Mo was supposed to have sound. I mean, the option to enable sound would be interesting (say a time-stretched audio instead of slowed down pitch).
THE-COPS said:
Camera output. That is, the resulting video file from the camera after pressing record button.
I know there is a loss of quality from compression. But it's not compression artifacts causing this. Bitrate doesn't make any difference. You can clearly see the video detail is not even close to what it says it is. I especially noticed this with text. I was recording a video while in a car. There was a car maybe 1-2 car lengths ahead. One can easily read the license plate. In the recorded 1280x720 video, I could NOT make out the plate at all. You'd thought I recorded in 960x540 or close. It's rather blurry. I think that's why LG added all that oversharpening.
I even set it to take photos at 1280x720. And even with high jpg compression zoomed/cropped, it doesn't look like the 1280x720 zoomed/cropped video of the same exact item being photo'd.
Been using Mark Harmons OpenCamera and trying all sorts of video bitrates. Then changing photo save resolution. I found that a photo resolution of between 960x540 and 800x480 (cropped) looks very similar to what a cropped 720P video appears. It seems as if there is some kind of preprocessing going on with the image that makes it appear extremely muddy (smudged blurry detail cropped). Nothing at all changed with the quality whether the bitrate was set at 5Mbps or 50Mbps. Quality remained unchanged.
Sounds like Oreo update isn't worth the trouble. As far as how it's coded... I think it's the awful preprocessing muddying up the image detail as I mentioned above. Using massively high bitrates does no good at all.
4K on tripod VS 1080 on tripod is quite noticeable on the V20 due to the appearance of upscaling (or horrible preprocessing.. whichever it is).
I didn't know Slo-Mo was supposed to have sound. I mean, the option to enable sound would be interesting (say a time-stretched audio instead of slowed down pitch).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who wouldn't want sound with slow mo? That's like no sound with regular video lol.
LG also made it to where 4k can barely be done via third party. Gcam can't...Open Cam can. Nothing can be done without root tho. Even then... limitations upon availability and know how. Manual setting is your best bet. Auto is well...auto, so definitely postprocessing will be involved and yes it's not the best, unless fixed with some mod, even if that works. LG hardcoded lockdowns. Camera firmware can be possible tweaked...but I do not know how.