Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Cell phone IQ and the future of camera systems
#1
Howdy,

 

The Google Camera App on my Android Nexus 5X (12MP)  cell phone now defaults to the so called "HDR+" mode as Google calls it (more info here). It's not very recent, this mode has been the default for quite some time now.

I have to say I'm rather baffled by the IQ it provides. In this mode, the app takes multiple shots which are averaged in order to reduce noise and increase DR. For casual shots, it works very well and the IQ is quite impressive given the size of the sensor.

 

Here are a few full resolution (12MP) snapshots as examples:
To go even further you might be interested in reading this article Experimental Nighttime Photography with Nexus and Pixel.

Impressive, isn't it? Sure, there is a lot of hand made work, but it just shows what's possible today.

 

As computational power and sensor read-out increases, this shows what will soon be automatically performed by our cell phones.

 

Here are the major 3 points I foresee for the future of mainstream photography:
  • Sensor size will become mostly irrelevant (1).
  • Both DR (2) and DOF (3) will likely become irrelevant as well because of computational power and the advancement in algorithms:
    <ul><li>The hardware will have the ability to take dozens or hundreds of shots and average them to decrease noise and increase DR, all of it in real-time and automatically.
  • The software will feature post-processing algorithms that will let users decide what aperture to use after the shot. It already exists and doesn't look great. It's just a matter of time until it's good enough that 95% of the population won't be able to distinguish a shot taken with a phone + simulated DOF and one taken at f1.4 with a FF sensor. The application will probably let you choose the character of the lens, bokeh, etc. rendering special lenses obsolete.
</li>
</ul>I sadly think that's what the future holds for us. We still have time to enjoy our real cameras, but the clock is ticking...

 

What do you guys think?

--Florent

Flickr gallery
#2
  The interest and progress from modern glass shows clearly that the image dedicated camera is here to stay, no prophotog is going to give up his Nikor 105mm F1.4 on FF to take "happy snappy pics" with the latest app. on his iphone, the same goes for landscape and sports/nature shooters.

 

  Maybe the first to leave will be 1" sensor shooters followed by µ4/3rders, but those printing large or shooting fast or just not wanting to be interrupted by an incoming call will stick to larger sensors and changing lenses.

 

         ...........and long may it be so!

#3
Quote:As computational power and sensor read-out increases, this shows what will soon be automatically performed by our cell phones.


Here are the major 3 points I foresee for the future of mainstream photography:
  • Sensor size will become mostly irrelevant (1).
  • Both DR (2) and DOF (3) will likely become irrelevant as well because of computational power and the advancement in algorithms:
  • The hardware will have the ability to take dozens or hundreds of shots and average them to decrease noise and increase DR, all of it in real-time and automatically.
  • The software will feature post-processing algorithms that will let users decide what aperture to use after the shot. It already exists and doesn't look great. It's just a matter of time until it's good enough that 95% of the population won't be able to distinguish a shot taken with a phone + simulated DOF and one taken at f1.4 with a FF sensor. The application will probably let you choose the character of the lens, bokeh, etc. rendering special lenses obsolete.


I sadly think that's what the future holds for us. We still have time to enjoy our real cameras, but the clock is ticking...


What do you guys think?


Sensor size is already starting to become irrelevant already, larger sensors still have the edge, but if you forget pixel count, it's easy for small sensors to outperform larger one, world's best high ISO sensor is actually a full frame sensor not medium format, it doesn't have a high pixel count though(it's a canon sensor not used in SLRs but in specialty video camera)
#4
Maybe lytro was on the right track, but their project was too precocious when launched, canon started already with dual pixel raw, they are testing how much focusing after shooting is important for users, maybe this would become a standard in the future
#5
Sensor size doesn't matter to the mainstream already. The truth is most people are happy with their phone cameras nowadays.

 

A lot of the things you mention are already being done in industrial applications. It's very complex and the approach is different than consumer products.

 

As far as the rest, I guess I could see a quick slider on a cell phone screen to manipulate apparent DOF while taking the shot. I'm thinking with a portrait starting with facial recognition then a slider to soften the background. This could probably be done already without multiple images. Phone cameras have deep dof to begin with too. Beyond that would you want to be dealing with xxGB raw files and spend time post process them later? Or get it right in the camera? Sounds like an old adage!

 

Years ago I had a camera that would do a dark image first then subtract out the background, and then do multiple shots for long exposures. The results were good. You did need a tripod. Kind of like Oly's gig moving the sensor to create a very high res image.
#6
Quote:What do you guys think?
 

Not going to try finding it, but in a previous post I said similar. It was pretty obvious that what I call "computational photography" will be close enough and even exceed in some areas what was DSLR photography for most. The only thing different is I imagine it to require multiple small sensors to provide that benefit. Well, they don't have to be small, but will be for cost and practicality reasons. Single big sensor will be a niche, with or without mirror. I suspect I've already crossed the point where I now take more photos on phones than I do with my dedicated cameras. The use cases are different though. If I want better quality, usually involving faster shutter speeds, I'll still lug the DSLR around.

 

BTW I have a Nexus 5X as my personal phone at the moment. I find the camera kinda ok but it isn't as good as the one in my older work Samsung S6. I'd say that was comparable to a higher end compact camera.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
#7
My phone camera sucks compare to a real camera (with a good lens); but it is great for that quick wide angle shot when walking around. Why is it great; I have it with me and i frequently don't have my camera. Also for web stuff and electronic sharing it is good enough and convenient (though sometime I get sick of the wide angle perspective). Anyway it is what it is and self evident as the market has demonstrated.

#8
Nice photos THXBB12!

 

I really like HDR effects, and it is a great example of something that is not very convenient to do with a DSLR with the so-called in camera processing.  My 70D has the capability but as far as I'm concerned it doesn't as a rule improve a photo.  The exposure time, I guess is too long, and/or the software does not align the frames correctly.  On top of that Canon obviously is conservative to let the photographer determine how far to boost the dynamic range, so even when not blurred, there's no noticeable improvement.

 

If you have a golf ball lying around, try taking a photo...I'm sure you'll have better luck than I had with my iPhone.  The thing is:  And I admit it!  It is so much easier to get a picture with my camera, that I don't use my phone camera except when I have no choice.  My iPhone has HDR to, but I just get frustrated with menu driven camera controls, and a touch screen that doesn't have any tactile feed back so you can watch your subjects and not your camera.

 

I think your photos were very interesting!  Probably beyond what an iPhone 5s can do, or maybe I just don't have the patience. 

 

I have had some fun with HDR shots taken using a tripod.  But even then I was only able to get surreal looking effects, and not the theoretical detail enhancement.  HDR along with Focus Stacking and Sensor Shift induced larger simulated sensor size and are probably going to come to small imager mirrorless systems first.  Meanwhile, I see a lot of traditional photographers (subconsciously?) undersaturating their photos for a bland, traditional look.  Undersharpening, too.  Well, it's just a matter of preference I guess.

#9
...In particular, I like the more 3D look that the first landscape has.  I assume it seems that way because you can see more shades into the shadows and highlights.  There are programs out there that allow for local contrast enhancement.  To me, the effects look a bit like HDR.  The software, in one step, breaks down the image into small pieces and then adjust the contrast to increase the detail instead of adjusting the contrast for the entire image.  It is an effect that one can be used subtly, or or exaggerated.  My photo icon/avatar is such a photo.  I happen to like creating unrealistic special effects, which I know "true photographers" tend to hate.  I hope I can be forgiven for that!  I don't really do it much anymore.  But by the same token, I have done some things that are kind of fun.  I used to live in the flight path of an airport and low flying aircraft would fly over head at night.  I was determined to try to be able to "see" the planes instead of only their landing lights.  Through post processing I was able to get some surprising results!  I don't know the rules for uploading photos.  If its possible, and I can find them, and if anyone is interested I could upload some examples.  I was really good at it for a while, but cannot seem to get the same results any more (lost interest).

 

Anyway, the last part pertains to the link to the Google researcher who was interested in night photography.  It involves many post processing steps.  Whereas the local contrast enhancement was more like, after-the-fact HDR performed on a single frame!  Naturally none of these techniques are even compatible with the modern versions of Photoshop.  I'm sure some of them are well known.  Free plugins like "remove black", and "remove white".  The .dll's are no longer part of Windows (damn Microsoft!)

#10
Great. I just don't feel tempted to get a cellphone smarter than me and for sure, telling a lot of stuff about my whereabouts to people I don't even know  Big Grin

 

We also might have different ideas about "high ISO" - 3 digits only? In my book, from ISO 6400 and higher we're talking about high ISO. Since some sensors already reached usable 12800.

 

But - no doubt, it's a way to go on, I also sometimes use my iPod to do quick snaps. It doesn't have the latest Apple camera tech inside, I miss the slowmo at times, but still: a camera you can listen to 1000s of songs with also has some charm.  ^_^

  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)