Hi. I've just get the unit today. It was exynos and I find out the camera was truly bad at dim condition. Even when comparing s20 ultra to note 9, the note 9 picture was much better. I have update my s20 ultra firmware to the latest from Samsung.
Look at the face. The s20 ultra result was having what looks like compression artifact. But it's right out of the camera without any editing. This only happen in dim condition. And also this happens to face only since other than face there's no artifact at all.
S20 ULTRA
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
NOTE 9
well for one thing it's blurry from the head moving. Second i agree it looks like $hit (no offense to your baby!)
I have no advice other than to say it's unbelievable we could pay $1400 for such an unfinished product..steadily I am losing more and more faith in samsung. At least you were able to get the camera to focus!
We all have similar issues and I think that all of us waiting for the next SW update are customers with a lot of faith. At least Samsung admitted it and if they cannot fix it with the next update then probably most of the phones will be returned.
did you know the 108 megapixel is not on by default? youll have to change the aspect ratio and before you take a picture it should show from the settings which megapixel you are using.
Same. It's very blurry / grainy (yet unnecessarily oversharpened) at the same time in low indoor lighting.
buddy66 said:
At least Samsung admitted it and if they cannot fix it with the next update then probably most of the phones will be returned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you link me?
xnostra said:
did you know the 108 megapixel is not on by default? youll have to change the aspect ratio and before you take a picture it should show from the settings which megapixel you are using.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What? The post has nothing to do with (and no mention of) the 108mp mode.
---------- Post added at 05:02 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:01 AM ----------
dazed1 said:
Can you link me?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They didn't admit anything. It was I think a Twitter post that said something like "Samsung is committed to delivering the best experience for their customers, blah blah blah constantly working to improve experiences for everyone."
It was generic like that
There was an answer to The Verge that they will work on to deliver the best camera experience. Yes it was generic but camera oriented and it is good that they responded.
xnostra said:
did you know the 108 megapixel is not on by default? youll have to change the aspect ratio and before you take a picture it should show from the settings which megapixel you are using.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not talking about the 108mpx. Also the 108mpx didn't help with the pict quality.
For now the only solution is to use pro mode.
Senjaya said:
I'm not talking about the 108mpx. Also the 108mpx didn't help with the pict quality.
For now the only solution is to use pro mode.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you turned off bixby scene optimizer? Watched a YT video earlier that claimed turning it off gets rid of the awful skin smoothing effects.
jwwagner25 said:
Have you turned off bixby scene optimizer? Watched a YT video earlier that claimed turning it off gets rid of the awful skin smoothing effects.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I've try it. No luck at all. The skin smoothing still happening
Senjaya said:
Yes I've try it. No luck at all. The skin smoothing still happening
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did a pic of myself after the ATBM update and my skin colour was the same as when I turned my head 90 degrees to the side. There was also no smoothing and I could see my pores and other natural stuff
buddy66 said:
I did a pic of myself after the ATBM update and my skin colour was the same as when I turned my head 90 degrees to the side. There was also no smoothing and I could see my pores and other natural stuff
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you use your selfie or the main sensor?
If you are using main sensor, could you try using auto mode and Pro mode and share the result to here? Also cna you snap your picture in dim area, since I notice the processing occurred in a dim area was more aggressive than on a bright area.
Senjaya said:
Did you use your selfie or the main sensor?
If you are using main sensor, could you try using auto mode and Pro mode and share the result to here? Also cna you snap your picture in dim area, since I notice the processing occurred in a dim area was more aggressive than on a bright area.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have used the main sensor and it was at work during day time with not bad light conditions. I will give it a try in light dimmed area and give you feedback.
buddy66 said:
I have used the main sensor and it was at work during day time with not bad light conditions. I will give it a try in light dimmed area and give you feedback.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. And also try move your head slightly when you snap the photo. I'm interested on the result.
Senjaya said:
Thanks. And also try move your head slightly when you snap the photo. I'm interested on the result.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. I noticed in your first picture the hair on your child's head is blurry. I have a feeling what happened is there was motion in the photo and in trying to fix the motion created all of the weird artifact effect. you'll notice the hair from your note 9 photo is sharp and clear, likely because there was no motion while the photo was taken.
jwwagner25 said:
This. I noticed in your first picture the hair on your child's head is blurry. I have a feeling what happened is there was motion in the photo and in trying to fix the motion created all of the weird artifact effect. you'll notice the hair from your note 9 photo is sharp and clear, likely because there was no motion while the photo was taken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The movement was indeed making the artifact worsen. But it also happen in no movement condition.
S20 ultra bad image processing
In this pict, the baby wasn't moving much (minimal movement) .
Movement make it worse.
This picture was in very bright room, the child wasn't moving and the artefact still happening, and take a look at the woman on the background. The artefact was really annoying
Yes I agree. I just took a photo of the news on TV and the anchors faces look like oil painting. How could Samsung have screwed up this badly...it's really unbelievable. And how more people aren't making afuss, I also don't understand.
jwwagner25 said:
Yes I agree. I just took a photo of the news on TV and the anchors faces look like oil painting. How could Samsung have screwed up this badly...it's really unbelievable. And how more people aren't making afuss, I also don't understand.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I don't know what's going with the silence.
For now I'm using the pro mode with all settings set to auto. This way the picture processing won't happen and the picture was very good.
Senjaya said:
The movement was indeed making the artifact worsen. But it also happen in no movement condition.
S20 ultra bad image processing
In this pict, the baby wasn't moving much (minimal movement) .
Movement make it worse.
This picture was in very bright room, the child wasn't moving and the artefact still happening, and take a look at the woman on the background. The artefact was really annoying
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It seems that the artifacts come from very bad hdr stitching. Try to take some photos with scene optimiser and hdr off, although it would probably make very little difference. The reason some other phones like pixel and iPhone cand take better shots of moving subjects is because they use something called zero shutter combined with a faster shutter. It means that the phone takes a lot of pictures before the picture is taken. Now, Samsung also uses a buffer since s9 with dedicated dram for the camera but probably is much lower and their hdr stiching is not as smart as Google's for example (accounting for movement in the frame). After all this time you'd think Samsung would figure this out but not many companies do this sadly). Also the big sensor that gathers more light should allow the phone to use faster shutter and bigger iso without introducing much more noise ala huwei.
Related
I've found the LED flash to be basically useless for taking pictures. Everytime I try to use it in a dark environment, the shutter speeds are too slow and the picture is both horribly overexposed and there is motion blur as well.
I understand there is no pre-flash firing to lock focus, but the camera should be smart enough to bump up shutter speed to actually take a usable picture in the dark with flash.
Does everyone's camera do this?
supdawg said:
I've found the LED flash to be basically useless for taking pictures. Everytime I try to use it in a dark environment, the shutter speeds are too slow and the picture is both horribly overexposed and there is motion blur as well.
I understand there is no pre-flash firing to lock focus, but the camera should be smart enough to bump up shutter speed to actually take a usable picture in the dark with flash.
Does everyone's camera do this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine takes awesome pictures, even in complete darkness.
supdawg said:
I've found the LED flash to be basically useless for taking pictures. Everytime I try to use it in a dark environment, the shutter speeds are too slow and the picture is both horribly overexposed and there is motion blur as well.
I understand there is no pre-flash firing to lock focus, but the camera should be smart enough to bump up shutter speed to actually take a usable picture in the dark with flash.
Does everyone's camera do this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Camera works great, it's no DSLR but it's just as good or better than any point and shoot i've ever owned. As far as the flash goes only time pictures are overexposed is when you are too close and try and use the flash. Cameras can't work miracles. If it's too dark for you to see your subject then it's too dark for the camera to see it as well and the pictures will look bad on any camera. As long as the lighting is reasonable the pictures come out great.
Jykinturah said:
Mine takes awesome pictures, even in complete darkness.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
might be a problem with the OPs flash
supdawg said:
I understand there is no pre-flash
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you use a led widget, it will stay on before, during, and after the shot but it is not as bright as the camera flash brightness.
supdawg said:
I've found the LED flash to be basically useless for taking pictures. Everytime I try to use it in a dark environment, the shutter speeds are too slow and the picture is both horribly overexposed and there is motion blur as well.
I understand there is no pre-flash firing to lock focus, but the camera should be smart enough to bump up shutter speed to actually take a usable picture in the dark with flash.
Does everyone's camera do this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine seems to work ok it can actually take a decent picture in complete darkness
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Jykinturah said:
Mine takes awesome pictures, even in complete darkness.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
michaelvibe said:
Mine seems to work ok it can actually take a decent picture in complete darkness
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what are your settings cause mine look crappy as well? met my favorite band and took pics and they all came out crappy.. luckly i had my canon camera as a backup but after one picture the bastard died.. if my phone was taking nice pics i could have had a collection of awesome memories
This is a typical picture taken with my camera in very low lighting with flash.
As you can see the picture is horribly overexposed. All I did was take the raw file an upload to imageshack with a slight crop.
Is this typical? Or do I have a defective camera? Camera takes good pictures in good light, but flash pictures are terrible.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Link to full res photo
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/6331/imag0052ou.jpg
Its a flashlight... Duh
supdawg said:
This is a typical picture taken with my camera in very low lighting with flash.
As you can see the picture is horribly overexposed. All I did was take the raw file an upload to imageshack with a slight crop.
Is this typical? Or do I have a defective camera? Camera takes good pictures in good light, but flash pictures are terrible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lower the brightness when you take pictures that close with the flash. It will help a LOT.
midri said:
Lower the brightness when you take pictures that close with the flash. It will help a LOT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the tip. I tried to recreate the picture at -2 & -3 exposures.
-2
-3
While lowering the exposure helps a bit, the pictures still look extremely soft to me (looks like the shutter speed was too low/motion blur).
I understand this phone won't produce DSLR quality pictures (I own a Canon 450D for that). However, I would like to get usable pictures with flash. To me, even at -3 exposure, these pictures are pretty bad.
Subject was about 4-5 feet away.
TIA
i think it's because the camera doesn't pre-light and focus before hitting the shutter, it just "focuses" in complete darkness then lights up the flash and takes the picture with an out of focus subject. Best way is to use a flashlight app to light it up, focus, then turn off the flashlight and take the pic
It's better than not having flash and not many companies are willing to go to the added expense (as well as sacrifice more space) of a xenon flash.
Just wanted to know if this was typical? Can someone post a pic of a person using flash in low light with flash?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
I took some pictures at night during the Fourth of July and the daytime pictures came out much better than my 10.1MP point and shoot, the camera is also about 5X faster, so I didn't miss nearly as many shots as my GF using my P&S.
Night time pictures on both cameras were also mediocre. Like someone here already said, if you can't see the person very well in low light, then the camera won't either. As soon as the flash goes off it flushes the area with light. Honestly, I think you are expecting a little much from a cellphone camera. Compared to every other camera I have owned (not owned a DSLR) this camera trumps both phones and P&S cameras.
Good luck, but I think your comparing apples and oranges seeing as you own a DSLR. Most phones don't even have a flash.
Brutal-Force said:
I took some pictures at night during the Fourth of July and the daytime pictures came out much better than my 10.1MP point and shoot, the camera is also about 5X faster, so I didn't miss nearly as many shots as my GF using my P&S.
Night time pictures on both cameras were also mediocre. Like someone here already said, if you can't see the person very well in low light, then the camera won't either. As soon as the flash goes off it flushes the area with light. Honestly, I think you are expecting a little much from a cellphone camera. Compared to every other camera I have owned (not owned a DSLR) this camera trumps both phones and P&S cameras.
Good luck, but I think your comparing apples and oranges seeing as you own a DSLR. Most phones don't even have a flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a fair assessment. I just thought that this camera could do what every point and shoot camera I've owned for the past 10 years could do. Take a sharp picture in a dark environment using flash.
And I've owned a phone with a flash before (Touch Pro). I cannot remember if it exhibited the same behavior, though.
I just don't think it's too much to ask for a camera to expose properly and give sufficient shutter speed to take sharp pictures while using the flash. I love having the LED's for flashlight purposes, I simply question it's functionality/usability as a part of the camera.
I am not talking about physical limitations of the sensor. The sensor is capable of doing it, but it just needs to be improved software wise by HTC. I understand there will be noise and grain in this type of sensor. I just want sharp photos that don't have all of their highlights blown all to hell on 0 EV compensation.
The exposure compensation setting at -3 to take is a real PITA considering its just not FEV, so I imagine even daytime shots would come out underexposed if you forget to switch back.
I just hope HTC does something to improve this camera/video camera. It's too nice of hardware for it to under perform the way it does.
Jykinturah said:
Mine takes awesome pictures, even in complete darkness.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you post a picture of someone taken about 5 feet away using flash in a dark environment? If you dont feel comfortable doing that on the forum, you could PM me.
I could look at your picture to see if it has the same problems as mine does.
easy fix take it. back and a ip4 it has a "better camera".
my camera takes great pics in the dark
sent with my evo from a secret place
Sporkman said:
easy fix take it. back and a ip4 it has a "better camera".
my camera takes great pics in the dark
sent with my evo from a secret place
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Care to share any?
supdawg said:
Care to share any?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To answer your question, yes these are typical results for a photo taken in complete darkness. The Evo, while pretty good for a cell phone camera, is comparable in quality to a cheap P&S camera (to me it looks slightly better than my wife's old Canon A430, but noticeably worse than my Canon SX100). There's nothing wrong with your phone.
Apparently, DxO Mark just gave out a score to Xperia Z1 and amazingly, just sits at 2nd place behind the Pureview 808 in overall Mobile Camera Ranking! :victory:
And that's without the "firmware updates" that will supposedly improve the camera!
I can't post the link as I'm still within the new user limitation of posting outside links. But if you're curious to see it, just do a quick google search for DxOMark and Xperia Z1!
More details:
Actually, the stills for Z1 stands at 5th place, however the video was deemed to be outstanding and the best in the mobile cameras and just 2nd place in their database behind the GoPro Hero 3!
If you're wondering what happened to the 1020, they also have an article on it and while they deemed the stills to be amazing and 2nd only to the 808. However, video was said to be lacking.
What are your thoughts?
bloodfire1004 said:
Apparently, DxO Mark just gave out a score to Xperia Z1 and amazingly, just sits at 2nd place behind the Pureview 808 in overall Mobile Camera Ranking! :victory:
And that's without the "firmware updates" that will supposedly improve the camera!
I can't post the link as I'm still within the new user limitation of posting outside links. But if you're curious to see it, just do a quick google search for DxOMark and Xperia Z1!
More details:
Actually, the stills for Z1 stands at 5th place, however the video was deemed to be outstanding and the best in the mobile cameras and just 2nd place in their database behind the GoPro Hero 3!
If you're wondering what happened to the 1020, they also have an article on it and while they deemed the stills to be amazing and 2nd only to the 808. However, video was said to be lacking.
What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess the big sensor is the key here. Dxomark doesn't reflect the real life though. I'm not very happy with the z1 camera... far too noisy especially at 20mp. Still better than my older nexus 4 anyway.
j0sh0 said:
I guess the big sensor is the key here. Dxomark doesn't reflect the real life though. I'm not very happy with the z1 camera... far too noisy especially at 20mp. Still better than my older nexus 4 anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just curious, what settings are you using? I'm pretty satisfied with the Z1 Camera of mine, but that was after tweaking some of the shooting settings I'm in. At first, I was pretty disappointed as well but now I think I'm good.
bloodfire1004 said:
Just curious, what settings are you using? I'm pretty satisfied with the Z1 Camera of mine, but that was after tweaking some of the shooting settings I'm in. At first, I was pretty disappointed as well but now I think I'm good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bought the phone yesterday so I'm still testing it. At the moment I like to shoot in manual mode at 8mp with image stabiliser on.
j0sh0 said:
I bought the phone yesterday so I'm still testing it. At the moment I like to shoot in manual mode at 8mp with image stabiliser on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah ok. That's good then. Shooting at 20MP especially in low-light results in (I'm not sure why) worse pictures than shooting at 8MP 4:3 .. in my tests, it resulted in darker images.
I also like to shoot at 8MP 4:3 to take advantage of the oversampling and leave the rest of the settings to Auto. One thing though is that I turn off the Stabilizer. I found that turning it on resulted in the camera choosing a much higher ISO than intended compared when leaving it off. This may be due to its detection of slight handshake movements and it tries to compensate by upping the ISO in favor of a faster shutter speed.
bloodfire1004 said:
Ah ok. That's good then. Shooting at 20MP especially in low-light results in (I'm not sure why) worse pictures than shooting at 8MP 4:3 .. in my tests, it resulted in darker images.
I also like to shoot at 8MP 4:3 to take advantage of the oversampling and leave the rest of the settings to Auto. One thing though is that I turn off the Stabilizer. I found that turning it on resulted in the camera choosing a much higher ISO than intended compared when leaving it off. This may be due to its detection of slight handshake movements and it tries to compensate by upping the ISO in favor of a faster shutter speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes shooting at 20mp is useless. Pics are so noisy... it's a shame. At 8mp the image quality is pretty good and yes, with the stabiliser on the iso is higher for that reason. But I prefer a bit more noise other than a blurred image.
j0sh0 said:
Yes shooting at 20mp is useless. Pics are so noisy... it's a shame. At 8mp the image quality is pretty good and yes, with the stabiliser on the iso is higher for that reason. But I prefer a bit more noise other than a blurred image.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice. What metering and focus are you using? Particularly for macro / night shots. I find that using Single Auto Focus setting doesn't keep the whole image in focus and just the middle part, but I find that the multi-auto focus setting doesn't do too well either particularly in macro shots. Currently, I shoot in landscape mode when shooting macro.
I'm using metering average (it seems to do a better job with white balance as well). About focus I always use touch focus... I like to choose what I want in focus...
I love th bokeh management of the lens.. look at this for example
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
j0sh0 said:
I'm using metering average (it seems to do a better job with white balance as well). About focus I always use touch focus... I like to choose what I want in focus...
I love th bokeh management of the lens.. look at this for example
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ohh nice, I'm gonna try that out Thanks!
j0sh0 said:
I bought the phone yesterday so I'm still testing it. At the moment I like to shoot in manual mode at 8mp with image stabiliser on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And there's you mistake - the software image stabiliser introduces noise. Switch it off.
Timaustin2000 said:
And there's you mistake - the software image stabiliser introduces noise. Switch it off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I know... but as I said I prefer a slighty noiser image than a blurred one. I'll try again without stabiliser anyway.
j0sh0 said:
Yeah, I know... but as I said I prefer a slighty noiser image than a blurred one. I'll try again without stabiliser anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hopefully new update has improved superior auto mode...
Try night mode can reduce noise.
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda app-developers app
Why is everyone so scared of noise I just don't get it. If the fine detail is their don't worry about the noise.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Yeah. The Z1 does lovely bokeh.
here is theDxO report for the Z1 which i could not find on DxO's website.
matheus_sc said:
I dont think samsung software is better, have more mods, but is very large and camera lags, i have gs4 9500 until last week
Sent from my C6903 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What i find telling from that review is this graph.
Above 80 lux the S4 shots have more 'texture' than the Z1.
Contrary to what people might think the Z1 has the best noise reduction indoors.
bloodfire1004 said:
Apparently, DxO Mark just gave out a score to Xperia Z1 and amazingly, just sits at 2nd place behind the Pureview 808 in overall Mobile Camera Ranking! :victory:
And that's without the "firmware updates" that will supposedly improve the camera!
I can't post the link as I'm still within the new user limitation of posting outside links. But if you're curious to see it, just do a quick google search for DxOMark and Xperia Z1!
More details:
Actually, the stills for Z1 stands at 5th place, however the video was deemed to be outstanding and the best in the mobile cameras and just 2nd place in their database behind the GoPro Hero 3!
If you're wondering what happened to the 1020, they also have an article on it and while they deemed the stills to be amazing and 2nd only to the 808. However, video was said to be lacking.
What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not much of a fan of them anymore, after I wrote to them to see if they would do the Xperia Z test again after Sony updating the firmware to fix the bad camera quality, they didn't even respond to me. On the flip side it is Sony's fault for shipping substandard equipment, get all the important things right first, especially the camera when they are making such a big deal about how amazing it is.
DxO finally got around to testing the G2. Overall G2 placed 6th. However in the photo section it ties with the Z1 in terms of score. A closer examination of the parameters tested shows the Z1 edges ahead slighlty.
Where the Z1 comes out ahead : Exposure & Contrast, Colour, Noise Reduction, Flash
Where the G2 comes out ahead : Autofocus, Texture, Artifacts
4 > 3 or Z1 ahead by a little.
What lets the G2 down is video, where its ranked 15th to the Z1's 2nd place.
If you consider phones alone, Z1 has the best video out there.
Now we have to wait for DxO to test the Note 3 to see whether it will affect the Z1's ranking.
Sorry to jump here like that, I don't even know all this stuff but after read what you guys saying is like the camera on Z1 was made for experienced people who know how to set up the device. This is a phone anyway and I like to go around and shooting everything but almost of the pictures are crap. That how shouldn't be with a camera on a phone with 20mpx.
Hello I wanted to create this thread because this phone is really nice and has a great camera, but not perfect at all, first problem is the raw mode, it's cool but why is has some darker corner and green tint ?? and it's only 20Mo instead of 30Mo with Camera FV-5 and ProShot apps.
But Vincent2167 find a calibration file : http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=61360315&postcount=314
LG still have to fix it and don't need this...
An other problem is the camera mode, we can't record in 1080p in 60fps, it kind of sucks for a flagship in 2015, but the worst is the 4K video, the video is pixelated, try to shot a landscape with a blue sky, you will noticed that the sky is very pixelated... probably because the bitrate is too low, only 30Mbps for 4K is low low. I read it's almost 50Mbps for the Galaxy S6.
To finish, the camera mode when you do a zoom, a close up, the mic change and the sound quality recorded become very bad, especially when you want to record a concert, you can see it here :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKJZqdD8oZc
@0:34 when we zoom the mic change and the sound is closed, pretty bad, when it unzoom the sound come to reality @1:28
Edit : I forgot the video stabilisation, I think LG can do better, and has to do something to activated or deactivated the stabilisation because it makes the picture very distorted when moving.
Edit 2 : The front camera pretty good details, but the background is always overexposed even with HDR activated, so bye selfies with nice landscape.
So please LG fix this, it's nothing, sound like you just wanted to contain all real potentials of the G4, and wait to make for G5 or what ?
Edit 3 : Since Marshmallow, videos in 4K have better bitrate, 46Mbps instead of 30Mpbs only with Lollipop.
Why doesn't the camera app have a night mode setting anymore? I'm too old to remember ISO and shutter settings anymore. In fact, the stock camera app seems to be missing many features that existed on the G2 stock camera app.
jlv3 said:
Why doesn't the camera app have a night mode setting anymore?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because its not needed any more. The G4 will take a night shot by itself if it thinks its necessary. It even does this with the front camera.
---------- Post added at 08:56 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 AM ----------
DoKaTSuYa said:
Hello I wanted to create this thread because this phone is really nice and has a great camera, but not perfect at all, first problem is the raw mode, it's cool but why is has some darker corner and green tint ?? and it's only 20Mo instead of 30Mo with Camera FV-5 and ProShot apps.
But Vincent2167 find a calibration file : http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=61360315&postcount=314
LG still have to fix it and don't need this...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the mean time use vincent's workaround.
An other problem is the camera mode, we can't record in 1080p in 60fps, it kind of sucks for a flagship in 2015, but the worst is the 4K video, the video is pixelated, try to shot a landscape with a blue sky, you will noticed that the sky is very pixelated... probably because the bitrate is too low, only 30Mbps for 4K is low low. I read it's almost 50Mbps for the Galaxy S6.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you see this mod ?
60fps does not seem stable but higher bitrate 48Mbs? at 4k looks to work. Needs root though.
Suspect they used a lower bitrate rate to keep file size, power consumption as well as heat low as possible. With the Z3 in warmer climates you could not get it to record 4k for more than 3 minutes (!) cold weather was better.
To finish, the camera mode when you do a zoom, a close up, the mic change and the sound quality recorded become very bad, espacially when you want to record a concert, you can see it here :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKJZqdD8oZc
@0:34 when we zoom the mic change and the sound is closed, pretty bad, when it unzoom the sound come to reality @1:28
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LG has been doing this since the G2. They think voice is more important.
Edit : I forgot the video stabilisation, I think LG can do better, and has to do something to activated or deactivated the stabilisation because it makes the picture very distorted when moving.
So please LG fix this, it's nothing, sound like you just wanted to contain all real potentials of the G4, and wait to make for G5 or what ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I find this one a bit odd almost like they did not get time to do it by the time of launch. it could be better.
Its early days so fixes are possible
jlv3 said:
Why doesn't the camera app have a night mode setting anymore? I'm too old to remember ISO and shutter settings anymore. In fact, the stock camera app seems to be missing many features that existed on the G2 stock camera app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You basically answered your own question. It's not needed anymore *because* we can now manually control ISO and shutter speed.
"Don't include features, people will complain. Include those features, people will complain."
Now when I use manual mode and move the MF slider all the way up to auto the camera app fc's. Anybody else experience this?
mcfhsieh said:
Now when I use manual mode and move the MF slider all the way up to auto the camera app fc's. Anybody else experience this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Using a custom dpi?
Yep 560.
One Twelve said:
Did you see this mod ?
60fps does not seem stable but higher bitrate 48Mbs? at 4k looks to work. Needs root though.
Suspect they used a lower bitrate rate to keep file size, power consumption as well as heat low as possible. With the Z3 in warmer climates you could not get it to record 4k for more than 3 minutes (!) cold weather was better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No I didn't thanks, but still need to be root.
mcfhsieh said:
Now when I use manual mode and move the MF slider all the way up to auto the camera app fc's. Anybody else experience this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Custom DPI does this. It does it with me too sometimes.
What is custom DPI ?
UP, I hope LG will fix it. Do you think the stabilisation in the video can be improved ?
Which one have the best accurate colors ? the warm or cold one ?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
I have the warm...
Oversharpening!
Too much oversharpening when zoom photos.. And warmer colors than reaity
---------- Post added at 08:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:19 PM ----------
DoKaTSuYa said:
Which one have the best accurate colors ? the warm or cold one ?
I have the warm...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you rooted devices? I own H815 and don't have OFF or ON on sliders in settings (just I or O).
If rooted, how did you change temperature? Root app?
No I'm not root, I found this picture here, and I went to the store, the LG G4 has different screen temps, in the store it was cold, mine is warmer... So I wanted to know which one has the best accurate colors or which one has been reviewed on internet.
Where exactly have you found this photo?
oile said:
Where exactly have you found this photo?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here : http://forum.xda-developers.com/verizon-g4/help/2-g4s-cameras-screen-temps-t3186732
Someone know the answer of my question ? "Which one have the best accurate colors ? the warm or cold one ? "
DoKaTSuYa said:
Someone know the answer of my question ? "Which one have the best accurate colors ? the warm or cold one ? "
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Neither. The warm has more yellow and the cold has more blue. some people like colder screens ie blue. Course the degree of tint matters, if its too yellow or too blue then its not good as you never see white. This matters if you are watching movies or seeing photos but less if you are reading docs say..
The term 'accurate' isn't a good one because accurate colours require expensive screens to reproduce and are not attractive to view.
So vendors tweak the colours so that they pop and are pleasing. it seems pleasing is more important to people than accurate.
there is no way to calibrate a phone screen either, android does not support it yet like you could do using a spider say with a regular monitor. And this calibration needs to be done on a regular basis to remain accurate.
personally i prefer warmer as its easier on the eyes. on my laptop i have a utility called f.lux that drops the colour temperature after sunset. otherwise its like staring into a headlight! have to turn it off when viewing photos but otherwise for working its been great.
i did the same with my phone using an app called twilight.
Ok, but when I said accurate, I meant the color reproduction of the others colors, I think I read someone said warmer teint has better color reproduction than the cold one but I can't find it anymore. Personnaly I prefer cold, because of his real white, but not too cold to be blue.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OAAy5D7E-U
How it can happened ? The sound didn't change when he zoom...
The camera is great overall, much like the S7 was and still is, however, I get a feeling Samsung's software is applying some sort of auto smoothing technique while shooting in Auto. I've noticed lately when I take a photo of someone in an environment, everything in the image is crisp with great detail accept for the person or people looking at the camera. Their skin appears a tad smooth, with no pores and less wrinkles, but the accessories they're wearing, and their clothes, are crisp with fantastic detail.
I've downloaded the stock Google camera app to test it, and in the same environment, the person's skin is how it was on the S7 camera, much more detailed and realistic. I can see pores and imperfections. What's stranger is, if the person is not looking at the camera, it's like the software doesn't recognize a face, and that person's side features like the skin has far more realistic detail as apposed to when they're looking at the camera and it becomes more smooth. I can see their freckles and pores more.
I thought for awhile my camera was back focusing and I just wasn't focused on the faces of people, thus resulting in a tad blurry face. But I kept noticing their hats and shirts, which are at the same focal distance, had fantastic detail. Taking a landscape or cityscape photo results in crisp and detailed images, but put someone at full length in the shot for a portrait, and their face is smooth as apposed to everything around them.
I have a hunch Samsung is applying auto smoothing of people's skin while shooting in auto. The Google camera app isn't doing that. If it's because they think most consumer's would appreciate smoother looking skin, well maybe ok, but that's what the selfie feature of beauty mode is for, not the rear camera.
Anyone else notice this?
I have the same problem. How can it be fixed?
JDM9499 said:
The camera is great overall, much like the S7 was and still is, however, I get a feeling Samsung's software is applying some sort of auto smoothing technique while shooting in Auto. I've noticed lately when I take a photo of someone in an environment, everything in the image is crisp with great detail accept for the person or people looking at the camera. Their skin appears a tad smooth, with no pores and less wrinkles, but the accessories they're wearing, and their clothes, are crisp with fantastic detail.
I've downloaded the stock Google camera app to test it, and in the same environment, the person's skin is how it was on the S7 camera, much more detailed and realistic. I can see pores and imperfections. What's stranger is, if the person is not looking at the camera, it's like the software doesn't recognize a face, and that person's side features like the skin has far more realistic detail as apposed to when they're looking at the camera and it becomes more smooth. I can see their freckles and pores more.
I thought for awhile my camera was back focusing and I just wasn't focused on the faces of people, thus resulting in a tad blurry face. But I kept noticing their hats and shirts, which are at the same focal distance, had fantastic detail. Taking a landscape or cityscape photo results in crisp and detailed images, but put someone at full length in the shot for a portrait, and their face is smooth as apposed to everything around them.
I have a hunch Samsung is applying auto smoothing of people's skin while shooting in auto. The Google camera app isn't doing that. If it's because they think most consumer's would appreciate smoother looking skin, well maybe ok, but that's what the selfie feature of beauty mode is for, not the rear camera.
Anyone else notice this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
renegadem4ster said:
I have the same problem. How can it be fixed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's definitely bizarre. Probably most consumers won't notice and if they do, don't care and maybe even some appreciate it. Again, I have no idea if this is indeed a little trick Samsung baked into the camera software, but I've stopped shooting with AUTO unless it's a landscape scene or I need the HDR mode (Samsung does a fantastic job with HDR without making it look cheesy fake).
My workflow is now I shoot in the PRO mode if my main subject is a person, and process with Snapseed or Adobe Photoshop Express. The details are crisp and awesome. AUTO mode makes the people's faces look like an oil painting while the rest of the scene is crisp with great detail. Totally bizarre!
I'd use another camera app, but the speed of shooting in RAW mode is so fast with the stock app, and if I need HDR, it's right there in the options menu rather than opening another camera app. So I'm still using the stock app, just changed my workflow.
That's very helpful, thanks. I will try that and let you know how the results are. I am coming from an S6 which does not exhibit this problem. It's a bit sad to me to see faces looking heavily over-processed. Interestingly this is something I found LG did in the past and the main reason I didn't get a G4 back in the day. Like you say it also seems quite specific to faces so I presume it's algorithmic and an attempt to prettify faces or something like you can do with selfies. It's just a pity it's not an option/flag because otherwise the camera is extremely capable, especially (I find) in dealing with difficult lighting.
JDM9499 said:
It's definitely bizarre. Probably most consumers won't notice and if they do, don't care and maybe even some appreciate it. Again, I have no idea if this is indeed a little trick Samsung baked into the camera software, but I've stopped shooting with AUTO unless it's a landscape scene or I need the HDR mode (Samsung does a fantastic job with HDR without making it look cheesy fake).
My workflow is now I shoot in the PRO mode if my main subject is a person, and process with Snapseed or Adobe Photoshop Express. The details are crisp and awesome. AUTO mode makes the people's faces look like an oil painting while the rest of the scene is crisp with great detail. Totally bizarre!
I'd use another camera app, but the speed of shooting in RAW mode is so fast with the stock app, and if I need HDR, it's right there in the options menu rather than opening another camera app. So I'm still using the stock app, just changed my workflow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
---------- Post added at 02:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 PM ----------
Sorry if I can ask just two questions:
(1) Do you have a Sony or Samsung sensor? I am wondering if it's a problem specific to ISOCELL since I don't see evidence of it in many reviews
(2) What specifically do you do with Snapseed?
Thanks
JDM9499 said:
It's definitely bizarre. Probably most consumers won't notice and if they do, don't care and maybe even some appreciate it. Again, I have no idea if this is indeed a little trick Samsung baked into the camera software, but I've stopped shooting with AUTO unless it's a landscape scene or I need the HDR mode (Samsung does a fantastic job with HDR without making it look cheesy fake).
My workflow is now I shoot in the PRO mode if my main subject is a person, and process with Snapseed or Adobe Photoshop Express. The details are crisp and awesome. AUTO mode makes the people's faces look like an oil painting while the rest of the scene is crisp with great detail. Totally bizarre!
I'd use another camera app, but the speed of shooting in RAW mode is so fast with the stock app, and if I need HDR, it's right there in the options menu rather than opening another camera app. So I'm still using the stock app, just changed my workflow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
renegadem4ster said:
That's very helpful, thanks. I will try that and let you know how the results are. I am coming from an S6 which does not exhibit this problem. It's a bit sad to me to see faces looking heavily over-processed. Interestingly this is something I found LG did in the past and the main reason I didn't get a G4 back in the day. Like you say it also seems quite specific to faces so I presume it's algorithmic and an attempt to prettify faces or something like you can do with selfies. It's just a pity it's not an option/flag because otherwise the camera is extremely capable, especially (I find) in dealing with difficult lighting.
---------- Post added at 02:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 PM ----------
Sorry if I can ask just two questions:
(1) Do you have a Sony or Samsung sensor? I am wondering if it's a problem specific to ISOCELL since I don't see evidence of it in many reviews
(2) What specifically do you do with Snapseed?
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can I find it which sensor I have?
Install Aida64 from play store (sorry I cannot link to it)
In the "Devices" section, if you have a Sony sensor it will say Sony something for Camera ID. If it's ISOCELL it will say SLSI_somethingsomething
JDM9499 said:
How can I find it which sensor I have?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
renegadem4ster said:
Install Aida64 from play store (sorry I cannot link to it)
In the "Devices" section, if you have a Sony sensor it will say Sony something for Camera ID. If it's ISOCELL it will say SLSI_somethingsomething
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the Sony sensor. And like you mentioned, there's prettyfying going on with aggressive image over-processing. I don't think it's hardware related because the RAW files are awesome. But AUTO mode definitely did not do this with my past Galaxy's (S6 & S7). In fact, the jpegs were so good I almost never shot in RAW!
I hope Samsung can scale this back on a future update. Realistic looking people is not always a bad thing.
Well it's good to know it's not the sensor type because they don't sell Sony varieties where I live. But yeah I mean in some other situations I take staggeringly good photos so I wish Samsung would just tone it down in an update or something. Otherwise I might just swap it for a Pixel/Pixel 2. It irritates me a bit but there's no real noise about it on the web.
JDM9499 said:
I have the Sony sensor. And like you mentioned, there's prettyfying going on with aggressive image over-processing. I don't think it's hardware related because the RAW files are awesome. But AUTO mode definitely did not do this with my past Galaxy's (S6 & S7). In fact, the jpegs were so good I almost never shot in RAW!
I hope Samsung can scale this back on a future update. Realistic looking people is not always a bad thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
renegadem4ster said:
Well it's good to know it's not the sensor type because they don't sell Sony varieties where I live. But yeah I mean in some other situations I take staggeringly good photos so I wish Samsung would just tone it down in an update or something. Otherwise I might just swap it for a Pixel/Pixel 2. It irritates me a bit but there's no real noise about it on the web.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"...but there's no real noise about it on the web."
I think because a majority of consumers honestly don't care if people's facial details are 'prettified', and honestly may actually appreciate it. I and other folks that love photography prefer the realistic detail though!
Guys what does that yellow auto button do in Pro mode?
I've seen it pop up now and then on screen in Pro.
choccy31 said:
Guys what does that yellow auto button do in Pro mode?
I've seen it pop up now and then on screen in Pro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you take a screen grab next time you see it? I'm not certain what it is you see because I don't see a yellow auto button unless I open up one of the manual control options like shutter speed etc., which is just an indication that it's in auto (even though it's the pro mode) and you're not manually adjusting yourself. If that makes sense...
I have seen this since the Galaxy S7 Edge. Samsung automatically sets up their beauty function on the camera that way when a selfie is being taken. Very simple to remove. All you have to do is click the icon of a woman's head on the bottom right and set everything to 0.
j0kerb0mb said:
I have seen this since the Galaxy S7 Edge. Samsung automatically sets up their beauty function on the camera that way when a selfie is being taken. Very simple to remove. All you have to do is click the icon of a woman's head on the bottom right and set everything to 0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That too, but we're talking about the rear camera. Not the selfie camera. The rear camera appears to also be applying a smoothing or "prettify" effect to people's faces when recognized. It's subtle, but enough to notice people's skins are smooth and less detailed then the clothes or their surrounding environment are.
JDM9499 said:
Can you take a screen grab next time you see it? I'm not certain what it is you see because I don't see a yellow auto button unless I open up one of the manual control options like shutter speed etc., which is just an indication that it's in auto (even though it's the pro mode) and you're not manually adjusting yourself. If that makes sense...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah that makes sense. So even in Pro it can sit select settings itself.
Does that mean will still take in RAW also?
choccy31 said:
Ah that makes sense. So even in Pro it can sit select settings itself.
Does that mean will still take in RAW also?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even in Pro mode, you can still let the shutter speed, ISO etc., stay AUTO. And yup, you can still save in RAW. :good:
So, in the end this irked me so much I sold the phone. I read a lot of reviews and chatted to some guys and the general consensus is if you want to see detail on faces, get a Pixel. I noticed also in testing (I tested against a few phones) that the iPhone 7 does the same thing but in a less exaggerated way. Lastly, I don't have enough cred to post links but check out Phandroid comparison of S5, S6, S7 and S8. This was exactly my experience coming from an S6 to an S8.
I did also do an experiment taking selfies with the rear camera. Previously I had mostly been taking pics of my kids. Now I'm a grizzled-ish dude. Lots of lines on my face and wrinkles. Too much sun, no cream, getting old. I won't lie the camera kind of made me look good. The combination of sharpening and smoothing made it a good pic. Maybe that is why nobody moans? With my kid, I miss the reality of it. Where are the freckles and fine hairs or tiny pimples on their faces? But with me it's like smoothing out flaws. Maybe that's why generally people like it. It creates pleasing pictures that may not be too true to reality. In particular the photos look best zoomed out so good for Facebook/Instagram.
Good luck with the Pixel guys. I bought one before my S8 and loved it until I started taking photos. Before I had taken my 5th photo I started noticing awful flare and halos whenever there was a light source anywhere in front of the phone - not even necessarily in the frame. My best photos are taken contre-jour and the delicate lighting effects you can get shooting towards the sun in particular can result in some lovely shots. Knowing I would have to stop taking these sort of photos was a real deal-breaker and I returned the Pixel and ordered an S8. I took a photo last weekend with the sun actually in the frame and got very minimal flare. It would have destroyed the Pixel photo.
The S8 is truly brilliant at handling difficult light sources, especially rear-lit. The only problem I had with it is the way it totally killed facial textures.
scgf said:
Good luck with the Pixel guys. I bought one before my S8 and loved it until I started taking photos. Before I had taken my 5th photo I started noticing awful flare and halos whenever there was a light source anywhere in front of the phone - not even necessarily in the frame. My best photos are taken contre-jour and the delicate lighting effects you can get shooting towards the sun in particular can result in some lovely shots. Knowing I would have to stop taking these sort of photos was a real deal-breaker and I returned the Pixel and ordered an S8. I took a photo last weekend with the sun actually in the frame and got very minimal flare. It would have destroyed the Pixel photo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
renegadem4ster said:
The S8 is truly brilliant at handling difficult light sources, especially rear-lit. The only problem I had with it is the way it totally killed facial textures.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A photo of my granddaughter. One of the first I took on my new S8. Can you see the issue here?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Looks pretty good. Not being familiar with your granddaughter it's difficult for me to comment how true to life it is. But when taking pictures of my own children on my S8, it had a super strong tendency to just wash away all the facial texture making it unnaturally smooth-looking. I don't think it would help for me to post the image because again you don't know what it should look like. On my S6, there is subtlety in the texture.. dapples of colour, fine marks etc. On the S8 it's just like smooth white. I'm not sure if that's making sense
scgf said:
A photo of my granddaughter. One of the first I took on my new S8. Can you see the issue here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're beautiful and everyone knows it. That's why you take selfies. Rate this thread to express how the front-facing camera of the performs. A higher rating indicates that the front camera produces fantastic results consistently.
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
#BEAUTYGATE once again.
Even with Master AI turned off, Portrait mode seems to want to smooth my skin and make the brightness horribly bright.
It really ruins the image, I feel the selfie camera, if anything, is worse than my S8 Plus.
The live preview of my selfie just as I am going to take it shows my face "beautified" to the point where even my hair is smoothened (I have black hair so it's really noticeable).
When taking the picture in portrait mode, it tells me it's going to sharpen it so I shouldn't move for a few moments.
The image then comes out, a lot better than the live preview, you can actually see my hair a bit better, however the colour is still horribly off, I'm a semi tan shaded person, however using this front facing camera, I Seem to be extremely light and white.
Please someone tell me it's not just me??
It could be a bug that the live image is making my face extremely smooth and then sharpening it up once I take the picture, but for what reason should it be like this??
Also, the additional modes for the funky colourful backgrounds etc, DO NOT APPEAR for me when using the live preview. It's only when I snap the picture will the image in my gallery appear with the additional effects.
Has someone found the settings to make selfies look good here?
I saw some video camera reviews on yt where selfies look great, but dont tell what settings they use.
anybody knows?
Surely a selfie thread needs example selfies ;o)
@default settings apart from screen mirroring turned off
Photo Mode
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Portrait Mode
In another topic someone mentioned that the quality will be improved with update 122.
YakuzaNeko said:
#BEAUTYGATE once again.
Even with Master AI turned off, Portrait mode seems to want to smooth my skin and make the brightness horribly bright.
It really ruins the image, I feel the selfie camera, if anything, is worse than my S8 Plus.
The live preview of my selfie just as I am going to take it shows my face "beautified" to the point where even my hair is smoothened (I have black hair so it's really noticeable).
When taking the picture in portrait mode, it tells me it's going to sharpen it so I shouldn't move for a few moments.
The image then comes out, a lot better than the live preview, you can actually see my hair a bit better, however the colour is still horribly off, I'm a semi tan shaded person, however using this front facing camera, I Seem to be extremely light and white.
Please someone tell me it's not just me??
It could be a bug that the live image is making my face extremely smooth and then sharpening it up once I take the picture, but for what reason should it be like this??
Also, the additional modes for the funky colourful backgrounds etc, DO NOT APPEAR for me when using the live preview. It's only when I snap the picture will the image in my gallery appear with the additional effects.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This happened to me too i have black dark skin and i look white on the selfie camera its so bright and overexposed. Same thing happens on snapchat
best24 said:
This happened to me too i have black dark skin and i look white on the selfie camera its so bright and overexposed. Same thing happens on snapchat
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that happens due to the image processing and what is desirable in Asian countries. The mass public they designed it for desire a lighter smoother face. But I could be assuming and completely wrong. My S9+ does this too and it drives me nuts. I hope it can be turned off somehow.
My gf just got a mate 20 pro. When we took our first photos together we immediately noticed they were so much whiter as compared to my s9+. Now I'm trying to find a solution so ended up here.
Disable the beauty effect..
in portrait mode you can change warmth so it can have some impact on skin tone.
I have a mate 20x but hence to same camera sensor i got a question... in portrait selfie i dont really get a bokeh effect (until i choose the backround light shapes) is that normal ? i think it should have a normal one too no?
Turn off all beauty features, except 'warmth'. In 'warmth' settings, tap on the most brown color on the left side, resulting in more natural image than none.
If u dont want overexposed face image, tap on the screen of your face first, then snap. But it looks like u loose HDR feature if taking pictures that way.
Hopefully these customer complaints will be addressed in software updates...after all, it's just processing (heavy handed) and not the camera.
That's true, the cameras on these phones is supposed to be top notch. Hopefully Huawei can adjust the software side to improve the results.
Why doesnt the front camera portrait mode blur the background?
It is meant to be like this?
Photo mode and portrait mode looks the same to me ( Front camera)
Some people claim that update 146 improves selfie quality. All I can tell is my lips don't seem to be pinkish as before but the overexposure processing still persists. Skin is pale and lacking details.
I have tried everything, including lowering exposure and choosing the darkest skintone. The photos still look weird. Post editing with google album app helps improve it, but troublesome when you have to share with family or friends.
In the end, I just ditched native camera app for selfie and am using hedgecam app. Lower one level of exposure and I look so much more natural.
I bought three phones from Huawei: Mate 8, P20 Pro, Mate 20 Pro. This problem has exisited since P20 series and still hasn't been addressed. Basically I have given up hopes. It's the Chinese sense of beauty.
pilico said:
Why doesnt the front camera portrait mode blur the background?
It is meant to be like this?
Photo mode and portrait mode looks the same to me ( Front camera)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you need to click on that star on left bottom corner and choose an effect.
Perereika said:
you need to click on that star on left bottom corner and choose an effect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks.
It is weird that we need to enable the blur feature after we select the portrait mode.
Is there any difference between the portrait mode with blur mode off and nornal camera mode?
For selfies, we find the usual smoothing of the skin, but it is not too pronounced here. Huawei pushes the luxury to propose some selfies effects with different backgrounds: pop, folding blinds ... the result don't make me happy.
_______________________________________________
UC Browser SHAREit MX Player
I think on .171 update, front camera got huge upgrade on low lights and skin tone looks much more natural now.