Van Nostrand

Joined on Apr 6, 2014


Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7
In reply to:

Kamox: It's surely better than my iPhone SE, but I still see a very aggressive noise reduction, which was implemented after the iPhone 5 (which I had and did not show that massive NR applied, resulting in cleaner images)

You can easily improve your Iphone SE camera quality in terms of detail and dynamic range and low light performance

1) use a 3rd party app called "CORTEX" It's in the app store. It uses the same kind of tricks used in the Iphone XS and Pixel2. Basically taking many pictures at once, stacking them, aligning them, and shifting shadows and highlights , optimizing exposure, reducing noise, for a desired result.

2) or shoot in raw format. There are some extra steps in involved but it's what pros and enthusiasts do as standard procedure. There is a free app called MUSE camera that shoots in raw format. You then need to process that file, also free apps for that too.

In good light the Iphone SE can take just as good or better quality 4k video, with the help of 3rd party apps to increase bitrate.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2018 at 22:25 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Where's the leap?
Apple have finally caught up to the Pixel 2, which is old.

The P20 Pro has updated firmware. And newer samples that I have seen look great. If there is still inconsistency, it's worth it for the quality of images you can get with the P20 Pro, IMO, if your main focus is still photography.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2018 at 22:07 UTC

I'd say it's a wash between XS and the year old Pixel 2.
1) Clearly Pixel 2 doesn't expose shots very well in lower light. And noise creeps-in fast in lower light
2) But Pixel 2 excels with textural detail in brighter light...DXO even demonstrates this in there XS review, so this isn't just opinion. Even in lower light, Pixel 2 holds lots of detail. Sometimes XS shots seem flatter even when Pixel 2 shots seem underexposed).

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2018 at 21:56 UTC as 70th comment
In reply to:

Max Thunder: Precisely, it is excessive noise reduction that is causing that unwanted look.

The question should be....was it intended. Did someone at Apple consider that level of noise reduction as what they wanted to give users.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2018 at 22:26 UTC
In reply to:

FlyinDoc: It's an astounding achievement and their rate of progress is incredible.

Sony for example already have all these tricks in their cameras: Pre-capture in their smart phones, Multi Frame Noise Reduction (which can average 4 or 12 shots), HDR modes, Anti-Motion Blur Scene mode which does image averaging, to reduce noise, yet keep moving subjects sharp in low light, and even a way to take up to 256 shots, combine them to simulate long exposure shots, and give you a single RAW output file aka Smooth reflections app.

What Google has done is combine these methods with incredible image processing and software algorithms to get the 3+ev improvement. All Sony have to do is use the tech they already have developed, and they could make a giant leap in image quality in certain situations, instead of relying solely on small gains they eke out from new sensor tech.

Will the traditional camera manufacturers implement computational methods please?

I have seen other cameras implement these techniques. Canon for one had some older point and shoot that did . DxO One does. There are 3rd party phone apps that do this, one in particular that really does it as clean as Pixel 2, but speed can be extremely slow.

I believe the Canon's and the Nikons etc don't do much of this at all is they prefer to develop hardware more than the software.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 11:54 UTC

I think Pixel phone /stacking tech is great, but hoping one day these developers consider that heavy saturation can be unpleasant.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 11:32 UTC as 35th comment

Everyone has free access to hi-res files at LOC website. Is it possible someone DLed them and passed them off to Getty as their own?

I don't doubt Getty would willingly attempt to profit from what they don't have legal right to, and have the audacity to try force the photographer of said images to stop using their own images, but maybe it is possible someone else tried to fool Getty. Anything is possible here, no? Details seem to be lacking.

Really shady it seems.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2016 at 03:21 UTC as 3rd comment
Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7