Green tint in raw images - OnePlus 2 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting

I am on OOS 3.0.2 and using camera fv5 for shooting RAW images (dng format) but the resulting image are over exposed to the colour green.Is RAW support broken in OPT?

ithesatan said:
I am on OOS 3.0.2 and using camera fv5 for shooting RAW images (dng format) but the resulting image are over exposed to the colour green.Is RAW support broken in OPT?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have found the OP2 camera to overexpose about a stop. It could be the green channel that's doing it, I haven't checked into it. I'll grab a few shots (raw) today and check them in Lightroom and UFRaw. Back in a couple hours with info.

OK so I took a few shots (OP camera, auto). I opened them in LR4.4 and UFRaw (latest). I see no signs of overexposure in any channel. Maybe it's the white balance?
You'll have to upload one of your DNGs for me to look at if I'm to be of any help.

Related

New Lightroom Mobile v2.1 Camera vs. Original Camera App, Front-Cam RAW

The new lightroom camera app does a good job Both pictures where shoot in RAW, ISO 100, 1/4s. The LR-RAW(15.4MB) is almost double size then the original RAW(9.48MB). I attached 2 crops (100%) from the images. The LR Picture have less artifacts (less NR?)
The lightroom camera is able to take RAW pictures with the front camera too
Best Regards
one more sample: ISO800 (LR Camera max. setting, while LG G4 Camera can go up to 2700), 1/30s, RAW, unedited jpeg crop (100%)
This time the LG G4 Camera picture (24.5 MB) is bigger than the LR Camera picture (19.3 MB)
ISO50, 1s, RAW, unedited jpeg crop (100%)
I couldn't find this app on store, just downloaded the apk and haven't installed yet.
I overheard LR manual mode doesn't have the option of exposure time, does it?
Since v2.1 the Camera has manual exposure settings (29s - 1/46224s), manual iso, manual WB & manual focus
Did you tried freedcam and Footej camera ? Freedcam generate 30 mb raw file with flat field correction and provide 60 sec expo on lollipop and 45 sec expo on MM. i liked JPEG compression of Footej camera. Must have apps if you own a G4 like me .
rajkatiyar07 said:
Did you tried freedcam and Footej camera ? Freedcam generate 30 mb raw file with flat field correction and provide 60 sec expo on lollipop and 45 sec expo on MM. i liked JPEG compression of Footej camera. Must have apps if you own a G4 like me .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
freedcam teh best....but very buggy .
freezing,not working flash ,etc,
rajkatiyar07 said:
Did you tried freedcam and Footej camera ? Freedcam generate 30 mb raw file with flat field correction and provide 60 sec expo on lollipop and 45 sec expo on MM. i liked JPEG compression of Footej camera. Must have apps if you own a G4 like me .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Footej camera looks promising, i will try this. Freedcam i've tried already some time before
Well, I thought DNG files should be the same, regardless of the camera app used. Your post made me compare DNGs processed with the same LR mobile settings, and I am very surprised by the results. I am sticking to Proshot for dng and jpeg (NR off)
Enviado desde mi LG-H815 mediante Tapatalk
---------- Post added at 10:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:57 PM ----------
I tried Proshot, LR camera and the G4 camera app. For whatever reason, iso400 processed. Proshot dngs come out with lower noise
Enviado desde mi LG-H815 mediante Tapatalk
The manual settings for the front camera (Lightroom camera):
ISO: 100-3000
Shutterspeed: 0.9s - 1/75347s
JPG/DNG
The original camera app does not support RAW/manual controls for the front camera
jetta20162 said:
The manual settings for the front camera (Lightroom camera):
ISO: 100-3000
Shutterspeed: 0.9s - 1/75347s
JPG/DNG
The original camera app does not support RAW/manual controls for the front camera
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where can you get this cam???
raptorddd said:
Where can you get this cam???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's inside the lightroom mobile app. can be found in the playstore

Mi 5S Camera Thread

Let's get a camera thread going here so we can showcase the Mi 5S capabilities.
Prone to lensflares, but very very nice! Low light performance could be better though.
Rotpeter said:
Prone to lensflares, but very very nice! Low light performance could be better though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice samples, when I get the phone I will try to mod it for better low-light performance.
You guys can also see some samples from Instagram here: https://www.instagram.com/explore/tags/mi5s/
shaneel1491 said:
You guys can also see some samples from Instagram here: https://www.instagram.com/explore/tags/mi5s/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice...even my samples are on instagram under #mi5s
Few photo samples from me. Great camera indeed!
megafileupload.com/82yz/Mi5s_samples.rar
porto12 said:
Few photo samples from me. Great camera indeed!
megafileupload.com/82yz/Mi5s_samples.rar
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As much as I'm interested in the great sample photos you probably took, I'm not gonna download some random .RAR from a one click hoster. Would you care to attach the pics in a post or up them to IMGUR?
Thanks in advance, I hope it's not too much of a hassle.
in daylight.mi5s's camera is great. amazing
but you need to use 3rd party camera like open camera to get nice picture. stock camera app is not good at low light
Rotpeter said:
Prone to lensflares, but very very nice! Low light performance could be better though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice! What ROM are you using? Are you using the default camera app or third party?
For perfect lowlight photos, must use manual mode.
tord00 said:
Nice! What ROM are you using? Are you using the default camera app or third party?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm on the Xiaomi.eu ROM and was just using full auto mode with HDR enabled. Due to me being on a trip with some friends I wasn't able to fiddle around with manual mode until I got the perfect shot -- but that's certainly planned for another time.
What settings do you suggest for low light shoots?
Attached from left are image no HDR, HDR, Light room android RAW edit super low light and light room android RAW edit morning sky. All taken using stock camera app.
The camera is quite miss or hit. Sometime the photo came out pretty mediocre but sometime its on par with s7.
aghiopro36 said:
Attached from left are image no HDR, HDR, Light room android RAW edit super low light and light room android RAW edit morning sky. All taken using stock camera app.
The camera is quite miss or hit. Sometime the photo came out pretty mediocre but sometime its on par with s7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you able to take RAW images without using the build.prop tweak?
shaneel1491 said:
Are you able to take RAW images without using the build.prop tweak?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course. Update to the latest official miui 8.0.18 from miui itself. It still china rom thou
Also found another site where there's lots of Mi 5s images posted
http://tieba.baidu.com/f?kw=%E5%B0%8F%E7%B1%B35s&tab=album&subTab=album_thread
christ-al said:
What settings do you suggest for low light shoots?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Play with manual mode, ISO 800-1600 and exposure time (1/15 - 1/18sec). have you a tripod, you can use iso 200-400 and exposure time 4sec or higher.
a lower ISO has better image quality!
Edit: add low light sample photo with manual mode
Pictures taken at a concert in different situations with really low light
Standard camera app (latest stable xiaomi.eu ROM), Auto mode, HDR and flash off
I've got some more to show you, too!
Some pictures with different light situations.
I'll try and do a comparison between miui camera and snap camera on cm13

[PSA] RAW quality vs JPEG Tests

After google announced that they have no plans to bring RAW support to the device I was curious to see what sort of quality the DNGs would be. Unfortunately I've found that the RAW files from different apps provide different results.
Apps used
Stock Camera App JPEG
Camera NX
Camera FV-5
Test 1: Straight out of camera RAW quality
All camera applications were left on full auto with touch focus on the far buildings.
Stock
https://imgur.com/a/ae575
Camera NX
https://imgur.com/a/UlR4s
Camera FV-5
https://imgur.com/a/ANvw5
As can be seen the RAW from Camera NX though very noisy is pretty standard looking. On the other hand Camera FV-5 is just awful with a stupid amount of noise.
This is interesting as inspecting the photos shows that the ISO for FV-5 was the lowest at 400 whilst NX and Stock used ISO 875.
Test 2: JPEG vs RAW quality
For this test I tried to use Camera FV-5 but it refused to take any pictures in the low light. Based on the previous test it's pretty obvious it would have fared worst anyways.
In this test I have tried to show the dynamic range of the files. Both were brought into Adobe Camera RAW, sliders for shadows and blacks cranked to max with the brightness and whites to lowest. I have also applied some sharpening and noise reduction to both.
The edits to both are identical
Stock Edit
https://imgur.com/a/9WPSy
NX Edit
https://imgur.com/a/UDEs9
The resulting images show that the RAW file is brighter and retains more detail. This can clearly be seen in the roof where JPEG artifacts are visible and the brickwork where detail is lost.
This can more clearly be seen when I brighten the JPEG so that it matches the brightness of the RAW
Stock Edit Brighter
https://imgur.com/a/N7YFz
Conclusions
I'd grown used to shooting RAW on my S7 Edge, luckily the new Pixels fully support Camera API 2. However it is interesting to see that the RAW readout is different per app. In regards to quality I will definitely be shooting the Camera NX in the future when I want a RAW file; however the JPEG quality is very impressive and lives up to it's hype.
Edit: 26/11/17 (From reddit post https://www.reddit.com/r/GooglePixel/comments/7fb9vu/technical_camera_test_raw_vs_jpeg/)
Test 3: LR vs Camera NX
Tried out LR in both 'Professional' and 'HDR' RAW modes. All photos have the same sharpening, noise reduction, white point applied. Blacks and shadows are maxed out with whites and highlights at minimum. LR HDR has exposure boosted to +2.65EV to match brightness.
NX Edit https://imgur.com/a/oUBhd
LR Professional Edit https://imgur.com/a/CsBa3
LR HDR Edit https://imgur.com/a/nuSNa
I was expecting LR RAWs to be significantly better. Unexpectedly the 'Professional' LR RAW looks similar to the FV-5 RAW, very blue with a whole bunch of noise.
The 'HDR' LR RAW looks much closer to the NX RAW, however there are some strange hot(white) pixels spread throughout.
Conclusions 2
I'll still be sticking with the NX RAWs for now, 'HDR' LR files are close but detail isn't any better and those white pixels are pretty noticeable.
Test 1 and 2 Full resolution and dng files: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1e2_sD7D1IiOg9Ety_8IsHAfhcKAVf9Eq/view?usp=sharing
Test 3 Full resolution and dng files: https://drive.google.com/open?id=17EIhsPAX5efHXPiz_cfkov3AKaDkREvg
Anyone got suggestions for more apps for me to try?
For my aesthetically pleasing photographs please visit my Instagram
Interesting post, thanks for sharing. Have you considered doing stock v nx v LR v manual cam & compare in lightroom side by side? I know with my 5X the hdr auto was visibly worse wrt detail than hdr on, and dng was another step up to that, basically incredibly detailed.
Does nx raw use hdr with the new 8.1 update enabling the visual core? Or will say manual camera use hdr+enhanced in it's raw outputs?
randomhkkid said:
Anyone got suggestions for more apps for me to try?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting read thanks. Did you try open camera? I experimented a bit and found the dng offered more flexibility in fixing exposure and white balance but needed a lot of noise processing to be as good as the jpg. But have been shooting both just in case I wanted to post process anything. So far haven't.
It never occurred to me that raw differed by app. That seems just wrong.
Linwood.Ferguson said:
It never occurred to me that raw differed by app. That seems just wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does seem wrong. RAW data should be just that, all the data from the camera before anything like an app tweaks it out. So yeah, it makes zero sense.
Hi, good thread!
I have somehow given up on RAW on Android because the implementations are so clumsy and the results are pitiful.
Indeed, to me too, the idea of having different quality raw from different cameras is plain stupid! Though I might admit it could be true given how lame the 3rd party Android cameras are. Such a shame a huge ecosystem such as Android cannot produce a fully featured and functional camera.
Btw you could also try one of the modified GCam versions with RAW enabled. Here is a nice page where you could fetch one such. Go for the stable ones, in red.
https://www.celsoazevedo.com/files/android/google-camera/
Looking forward for your results!
You clearly don't understand what RAW is, or how ****ty phone cams are under the hood
The fact that you think that FV5 is the one giving bad results just shows that you don't understand what RAW files are supposed to be.
Phones, even our allegedly amazing DSLR killing wonders of today have ridiculously tiny sensors and take garbage photos. NO qualifications here, they take garbage photos.
Through magic, detail smearing software processing, we get some usable results.
Camera FV5 is outputting a real RAW file, complete with the stupid amount of noise captures by the tiny, crappy sensor in your phone.
Camera NX is evidently doing almost as much processing as the default engine and not outputting a real RAW file at all.
If you're wondering why Google downplays RAW support, it's because they know that for most people it will just reveal how crappy the camera really is and how much software trickery is going on.
Bingley said:
Interesting post, thanks for sharing. Have you considered doing stock v nx v LR v manual cam & compare in lightroom side by side? I know with my 5X the hdr auto was visibly worse wrt detail than hdr on, and dng was another step up to that, basically incredibly detailed.
Does nx raw use hdr with the new 8.1 update enabling the visual core? Or will say manual camera use hdr+enhanced in it's raw outputs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't tried since the 8.1 update. A little busy at the moment with my Master's unfortunately. I will try to do more comparisons in a few weeks after finals. For now I've updated the OP with some results from Lightroom's camera.
Linwood.Ferguson said:
Interesting read thanks. Did you try open camera? I experimented a bit and found the dng offered more flexibility in fixing exposure and white balance but needed a lot of noise processing to be as good as the jpg. But have been shooting both just in case I wanted to post process anything. So far haven't.
It never occurred to me that raw differed by app. That seems just wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
pixelsquish said:
It does seem wrong. RAW data should be just that, all the data from the camera before anything like an app tweaks it out. So yeah, it makes zero sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't shoot the messenger! The RAW files are definitely different, unsure why, likely due to API differences and when the RAW files is read in the image pipeline.
dehnhaide said:
Hi, good thread!
I have somehow given up on RAW on Android because the implementations are so clumsy and the results are pitiful.
Indeed, to me too, the idea of having different quality raw from different cameras is plain stupid! Though I might admit it could be true given how lame the 3rd party Android cameras are. Such a shame a huge ecosystem such as Android cannot produce a fully featured and functional camera.
Btw you could also try one of the modified GCam versions with RAW enabled. Here is a nice page where you could fetch one such. Go for the stable ones, in red.
https://www.celsoazevedo.com/files/android/google-camera/
Looking forward for your results!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CameraNX is the same as the modded Google camera with RAW support.
lordfarqaud said:
The fact that you think that FV5 is the one giving bad results just shows that you don't understand what RAW files are supposed to be.
Phones, even our allegedly amazing DSLR killing wonders of today have ridiculously tiny sensors and take garbage photos. NO qualifications here, they take garbage photos.
Through magic, detail smearing software processing, we get some usable results.
Camera FV5 is outputting a real RAW file, complete with the stupid amount of noise captures by the tiny, crappy sensor in your phone.
Camera NX is evidently doing almost as much processing as the default engine and not outputting a real RAW file at all.
If you're wondering why Google downplays RAW support, it's because they know that for most people it will just reveal how crappy the camera really is and how much software trickery is going on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah this is where you're wrong. The actual RAW files you seem to be talking about are not debayered or processed in any way, the RAW files we traditionally talk about (DNG, NEF, CR2) are all already processed by the app or camera logic in some way to be as flat and neutral as possible whilst containing more info in shadows, highlights etc.
That's why we see difference in the output, the apps are processing the RAW output differently. The camera in the Pixel is still a good sensor, just that the software magic makes it the best in the industry. There is still merit to shooting in RAW compared to the jpeg output.
I am surprised that you guys don't know the difference.
Google's HDR+ captures multiple images (allegedly up to 8 or 10) in order to improve the image quality(noise, colors, dynamic range). But when you take a raw photo with a 3rd party app, you get worse image quality because usually the raw file relies on a single image.
Adobe's HDR raw automatically combines raw files (probably two or three) for a better dynamic range.
The NX app is a modified Google camera app. Therefore the app contains Google's HDR+ algorithm. Apparently Google's camera app has the option to use HDR+ for the raw files (so multiple raw files are combined for a much better image quality), but Google hasn't activated the feature yet. But apparently the developer of the NX app found a way to activate it.
I hope that Google activates this feature soon, so then we don't need a 3rd party apk anymore.
Ah this is where you're wrong. The actual RAW files you seem to be talking about are not debayered or processed in any way
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A raw file contains, or should contain raw, "undebayered" sensor data. The processing software (lightroom, camera raw, etc, does the demosaicing.
the RAW files we traditionally talk about (DNG, NEF, CR2) are all already processed by the app or camera logic in some way to be as flat and neutral as possible whilst containing more info in shadows, highlights etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's true that most camera makers probably mess with their raw data prior to some degree prior to saving the data, but it's not correct to say that the files are already processed by the app. Most apps will apply a default profile when you open the file, but nothing is processed until you, er, process it.
That's why we see difference in the output, the apps are processing the RAW output differently.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They certainly are, in that Camera NX is processing it to such a degree that it's can hardly be claimed to be a RAW file anymore, and FV5 is giving something that appears to have been barely touched, as it should.
The camera in the Pixel is still a good sensor, just that the software magic makes it the best in the industry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a good sensor compared to other smartphone sensors, but it's still a piece of garbage in absolute terms, which is why it only looks good with that software "magic".
There is still merit to shooting in RAW compared to the jpeg output.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, nothing to do with the point I was making, which is that Camera NX is not giving better RAW output, it's not giving RAW output at all. And if you truly do want to see what the sensor is actually capturing, and work with that, only Camera FV5 in this comparison appears to be giving you that.
Should anyone be following this thread the new Pixel 3 camera apk is available and works on the Pixel 2 - it now has native raw support, and frankly it's great - jpegs still look ****e up close, whereas raw/dng files it produces are so clear it's amazing how Google manages to mangle the jpegs in cam!

Difference between gcam 12 mpx and gcam with magisk 48mpx module

Hello.
Could you post two identical photos to see the difference between a photo taken with gcam in 12 mpx and one with the magisk module of 48 mpx activated?
I ask you this because it is the only reason why I could unlock my mi9t firmware.
Thank you.
alessa said:
Hello.
Could you post two identical photos to see the difference between a photo taken with gcam in 12 mpx and one with the magisk module of 48 mpx activated?
I ask you this because it is the only reason why I could unlock my mi9t firmware.
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In 48px mode, the camera wass lagger, auto focus was slower and hard to focus. The different was only when you zoom.
alessa said:
Hello.
Could you post two identical photos to see the difference between a photo taken with gcam in 12 mpx and one with the magisk module of 48 mpx activated?
I ask you this because it is the only reason why I could unlock my mi9t firmware.
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both are 12mp, but the 48mp is a fake mode to render the pics in a higher resolution. But it will lose definition
So you advised me not to unlock my mi9t for that because it is not worth it is it?
Thank you for your advice, but I would still like to give me my opinion so, I will still wait for a comparative photo ?
alessa said:
So you advised me not to unlock my mi9t for that because it is not worth it is it?
Thank you for your advice, but I would still like to give me my opinion so, I will still wait for a comparative photo
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.mediafire.com/view/vc25nlpx4lr1e4n/IMG_20200216_102919.jpg
http://www.mediafire.com/view/hy3vt6x8tm1hc5g/IMG_20200216_102741.jpg
chuate92 said:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/vc25nlpx4lr1e4n/IMG_20200216_102919.jpg
http://www.mediafire.com/view/hy3vt6x8tm1hc5g/IMG_20200216_102741.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, and what is the 48mpx?
EDITk i saw ? one last little request, can you take a picture of a close object like a flower or a statue etc ...
I hope I don't ask too much ...
alessa said:
Thanks, and what is the 48mpx?
EDITk i saw one last little request, can you take a picture of a close object like a flower or a statue etc ...
I hope I don't ask too much ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.mediafire.com/view/aa9uv1tv2691rn1/IMG_20200326_080108.jpg#
http://www.mediafire.com/view/sh2cdlnffzlpprj/IMG_20200326_080052.jpg#
http://www.mediafire.com/view/v3v9jqbevm7lee1/IMG_20200325_235326.jpg
http://www.mediafire.com/view/tuip7nodnstw9i7/IMG_20200325_235254.jpg#
chuate92 said:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/aa9uv1tv2691rn1/IMG_20200326_080108.jpg#
http://www.mediafire.com/view/sh2cdlnffzlpprj/IMG_20200326_080052.jpg#
http://www.mediafire.com/view/v3v9jqbevm7lee1/IMG_20200325_235326.jpg
http://www.mediafire.com/view/tuip7nodnstw9i7/IMG_20200325_235254.jpg#
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thankyou so mutch?
The difference is really minimal, it is especially at the time of the zoom but otherwise the image as a whole is practically identical in quality..
In my tests, using raw files, there was a decent amount of difference. but again, the "need" for the extra detail is very rare. 12mp raw is good enough. I enable the 48mp only in special occasions.
will post a few tests tomorrow
malowz said:
In my tests, using raw files, there was a decent amount of difference. but again, the "need" for the extra detail is very rare. 12mp raw is good enough. I enable the 48mp only in special occasions.
will post a few tests tomorrow
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What about night mode photos? Is there a difference?
12mp resized 2x bicubic and cropped 100% to make them the same size for comparison. ignore contrast/color/adjustments between raw and jpeg, as it is more about detail then raw processing settings.
raw taken with latest Urnyx05 GCam, jpeg taken with ANXcamera (basically the same as stock camera)
jpeg 12mp:
https://i.imgur.com/1nq8yHw.jpg
jpeg 48mp:
https://i.imgur.com/m3VmSE1.jpg
raw 12mp:
https://i.imgur.com/ASRvvYa.jpg
raw 48:
https://i.imgur.com/LpHl5ip.jpg
alessa said:
What about night mode photos? Is there a difference?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
will test tonight.
malowz said:
12mp resized 2x bicubic and cropped 100% to make them the same size for comparison. ignore contrast/color/adjustments between raw and jpeg, as it is more about detail then raw processing settings.
raw taken with latest Urnyx05 GCam, jpeg taken with ANXcamera (basically the same as stock camera)
jpeg 12mp:
https://i.imgur.com/1nq8yHw.jpg
jpeg 48mp:
https://i.imgur.com/m3VmSE1.jpg
raw 12mp:
https://i.imgur.com/ASRvvYa.jpg
raw 48:
https://i.imgur.com/LpHl5ip.jpg
will test tonight.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kevineddu sei tu?
alessa said:
kevineddu sei tu?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
????
i only speak portuguese and "half english".
malowz said:
????
i only speak portuguese and "half english".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry i thought it was someone else ?
in my tests, night shot does not benefit from using raw nor 48mp raw, as the raw does not have the result of the night shot processing, so the jpeg result is wayyy better and cleaner than the raw.
you need a lot of cleaning and filtering to the raw to make it look good.
also, with the 48mp module enable you get artifacts on the image and preview if the ISO gets to high.
so, in summary, no, 48mp is not useful for low light.
if your scene is "stationary", and you have a tripod, a photo with long shutter time is miles better, as you can get a super clean image from a night scene. But gcam does not have manual options, so another app is necessary, like hedgecam2. also, the 48mp module allow doubling the shutter time (60s from 30s original) so you can take very slow and super clean night images, for stationary scenes and tripod use.
but i don't know if there is an app to allow 48mp raw and manual adjustments, to have a 48mp raw night image. hedgecam can do manual with 48mp jpeg + 12mp raw only, but if you enable the magisk 48mp module and shoot raw, it crashes hedgecam
hedgecam2 + gcam + ANXCamera + 48mp module, are the "almost complete" package to take the best you can from mi 9t

Camera Resolution

Been playing around with camera resolution and I understand that while the actual sensor is 48MP OP defaults it to 12MP to "capture" more details (I think thing the 48MP setting provides better shots but that's subjective).
Now the question/issue that I have is when looking in Google Photos (gallery) the shots are being reported at various resolutions... most of the time not close to the 12MP that the sensor is supposed to capture the image at.
Regular lense, showing as 7.2MP --- 4000x1800 resolution (setting in Camera app is 12MP - 6.59mm)
Wide lense, showing 7.2MP --- 4000x1800 resolution (setting in Camera app is 12MP - 3.05mm)
Tele lense, showing 4.8MP --- 3264x1472 resolution (6.95mm)
Bokeh shots appear to be showing higher res, like 13MP.
Pictures taken from my old Pixel 2XL show consistently 12.2MP which I believe is the sensor size so I'm trying to figure out what setting may be affecting the resolution. File size are significantly smaller on the 7.2MP shots so I'm sure I'm losing some quality here.
Switch to 4:3.
You are shooting in 20:9 hence the lower resolution.
Perfect ty. I did select full looks like. Went back to 4:3 and seems to show the correct mp.
Sent from my IN2025 using Tapatalk
is there a way to fix it to provide 16:9?

Categories

Resources